Is there some truth to the perception that gay men are promiscuous?

MultiUmm · 26-06-2014 2:08am #1

Time and time again I've heard off family members and friends the old adage that gay men are naturally more promiscuous than heterosexual people and are more inclined towards having casual sex with each other. I always refuted this but lately I've had reason to question my stance.

So many guys out there seem to just want sex - whether it's a causal once off hook-up arrangement or otherwise, NSA seems to be quite prevalent among the gay community. Is it because gay people are likely to be less sexually inhibited than heterosexuals or is it a matter of "if you can't beat them, join them"?

I personally don't do NSA but I don't judge or frown upon those who partake in it. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it can be hard to find a guy who wants that bit more than casual sex, or monogamy even.

What's everyone's opinions on this? Are we more promiscuous or is it just another stereotype perpetuated about gay people?

J_E · 26-06-2014 2:36am

There is no doubt gay men are more sexually active. Men in general have a higher need for sex (biologically speaking), when you put two of them together, it's inevitable that stuff happens! It doesn't mean all men have such a sex drive though, and that's where those perceptions are damaging and wrong. If anything, it's more of a subtle sign that society at large still refuses to acknowledge female sexual activity on the same level and focus so much on men.

moc moc a moc · 26-06-2014 2:36am

Men in general are as promiscuous as they are able to be. If straight men could get it as easily as gay men can, we would be just as promiscuous.

floggg · 26-06-2014 10:28am

Cydoniac wrote: »

There is no doubt gay men are more sexually active. Men in general have a higher need for sex (biologically speaking), when you put two of them together, it's inevitable that stuff happens! It doesn't mean all men have such a sex drive though, and that's where those perceptions are damaging and wrong. If anything, it's more of a subtle sign that society at large still refuses to acknowledge female sexual activity on the same level and focus so much on men.

I think that's inaccurate. There's no evidence that men have a higher sex drive at all AFAIK. Women are equally capable of having a high or low sex drive as men.

The main difference is social expectations/conditions. A (straight) man who likes to indulge his sexual appetite is seen as virile, healthy and an alpha male type character. They got props for it.

A woman, on the other hand, who indulges her sexual appetites is slut shamed and seen of low character.

It's pathetic in my book but unfortunately that's the way society is.

To answer the Op's question - maybe we engage in more casual sex than straight couples. But it would be very naive to assume that's just due to a difference in the way we are wired.

There is probably a variety of reasons:

There's historic reasons - e.g. During criminalisation/homophobic society days, it was a lot harder for gay people to meet and gay relationships were a lot harder to maintain so cruising tended to be a lot of gay men's only outlet - quick anonymous encounters in neutral locations. A cruising/hook-up culture developed as a result.

There's cultural reasons relating to society's expectations for women - straight couples have less casual encounters than they probably would otherwise because women are told they shouldn't do so if they want to be respected; and gay men get to have more sex as they are generally free from that culture and can engage on their own terms (though there are aome guys who try and apply the slut shaming crap to gay men, though not generally straight men - which is annoying for many reasons, not least that they apply a "female" standard to us).

There also the fact that LGBT people (male and female) may tend to have more open and positive attitudes to sex and sexual experimentation than straight couples, which is a by-product of accepting our supposed sexual deviancy. Once you accept you are gay, you quickly have to accept that you have an unconventional sex life. For gay men for example, once you get your mind right with fellatio and anal sex (something men aren't "supposed" to do), other sexual taboos tend not to have as much a hold on you. So gay people will tend to have a more open and positive attitude to sex, which means they are more likely to engage in it recreationally.

floggg · 26-06-2014 10:31am

moc moc a moc wrote: »

Men in general are as promiscuous as they are able to be. If straight men could get it as easily as gay men can, we would be just as promiscuous.

Ironically if straight men stopped slut shaming so much they'd get it more often!

E.g. Friends of mine who don't see their own one night stands as indicating bad character on their part, but have said they would be unlikely to go out with a girl who participated in one with them as they wouldn't respect her if she engaged in casual sex.

Boskowski · 26-06-2014 10:36am

floggg wrote: »

Ironically if straight men stopped slut shaming so much they'd get it more often!

E.g. Friends of mine who don't see their own one night stands as indicating bad character on their part, but have said they would be unlikely to go out with a girl who participated in one with them as they wouldn't respect her if she engaged in casual sex.

This is rather widespread and these guys are absolute tools and shouldn't be getting anything at all. But thats not whats happening which is just another indicator of sexual relations being anything but rational.

Lyaiera · 26-06-2014 12:31pm

I read a New Yorker piece about gay marriage a while ago (I think it was New Yorker anyway.) The author had done a study on gay marriage and found gay men were more sexually active than their straight counterparts, however they were more monogomous once they became engaged or married. And even more they were far more open to sexual experimentation within marriages, so there were higher rates of consensual threesomes and swinging with fair less cheating and affairs.

What I got from it was that gay men seemed to be less sexually inhibited and therefore far more open about sexuality, both within and outside of marriage. And that there was a lot of mutual respect for people's decisions about their sexuality and committment.

The main study was about the effects of gay marriage on traditional marriage. It found that gay marriages were as stable as straight marriage, if not more so. And rather than weakening straight marriage the introduction of gay marriage saw a growth in straight marriage, a growth in the industry surrounding it and general attitudes towards marriage being more positive overall. And that included straight couples changing their opinion that marriage was an option for them when previously they were against it.

(There was also a large part of the article dedicated to lesbian behaviour but I can't recall it offhand. It's a great article and I posted about it in here at the time but I don't think many people read it.)

theperson2014 · 26-06-2014 12:49pm

I've noticed 'flogg' can be rather provocative and contentious. Can it be cautioned with a warning or something?

Ten of Swords · 26-06-2014 2:32pm

There is a button to report posts you think the moderators should rewiew in the left margin.

For what it's worth I don't think there is anything wrong with floggg's recent posts. Perhaps you should look to your own recent posts first such as berating Grindr users when that was not even relevant to the thread you were replying to.

J_E · 26-06-2014 2:57pm

floggg wrote: »

I think that's inaccurate. There's no evidence that men have a higher sex drive at all AFAIK.

They do. Women have higher sex drives than society at large would want you to know (and it is highly influenced by environment and perceptions) but I think the general consensus is that men seek sex more. Men have sperm to get rid of, and there's only one easy way to do that!

Annasopra · 26-06-2014 3:08pm

theperson2014 wrote: »

I've noticed 'flogg' can be rather provocative and contentious. Can it be cautioned with a warning or something?

Any issues use the report post button

Annasopra · 26-06-2014 3:09pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

They do. Women have higher sex drives than society at large would want you to know (and it is highly influenced by environment and perceptions) but I think the general consensus is that men seek sex more. Men have sperm to get rid of, and there's only one easy way to do that!

I'm always wary of accepting all statements portrayed as fact at face value particularly when there is a request for evidence and none is forthcoming.

J_E · 26-06-2014 3:15pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I'm always wary of accepting all statements portrayed as fact at face value particularly when there is a request for evidence and none is forthcoming.

I walked into that one, fair enough! I think if we removed the heavy societal pressure on women, the balances would probably even out a lot more. It is also true that men have one shot while women can keep going!

Men definitely do seek sex more though, make of that what you will.

floggg · 26-06-2014 3:37pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

They do. Women have higher sex drives than society at large would want you to know (and it is highly influenced by environment and perceptions) but I think the general consensus is that men seek sex more. Men have sperm to get rid of, and there's only one easy way to do that!

Tendency to have sex and sex drive aren't necessarily the same. Just because a man might seek sex more often than a woman, it doesn't necessarily mean a higher sex drive.

It could well be the woman has a higher sex drive but for whatever reason doesn't feel like she should seek out sexual encounters outside of a relationship - such as due to the cultural reasons I referred to.

floggg · 26-06-2014 3:37pm

theperson2014 wrote: »

I've noticed 'flogg' can be rather provocative and contentious. Can it be cautioned with a warning or something?

I am not an "it."

Amirani · 27-06-2014 9:32am

floggg wrote: »

I am not an "it."

I would hope they were referring to the supposed "contentiousness" with that word.

Annasopra · 27-06-2014 9:50am

Diego Simeone wrote: »

I would hope they were referring to the supposed "contentiousness" with that word.

Folks can we move on and stay on topic

ongarboy · 27-06-2014 10:08am

In a way is the thread title contradictory? Truth and perception are two different things.

Yes, there is a perception among some that gay men are more promiscuous. Is it the truth though? Well, I cannot categorically say but some good solid posts earlier in this thread give good reasons why this may or may not be the case.

I'm sure there are plenty of closeted gay men (even in 2014) who desire other men but are too afraid to do anything about it for fear of being outed. They also do not have sex with women and remain involuntarily celibate. Straight men do not have this obstacle. So this counter argument could be used to say a lot of gay men are less promiscuous than their straight counterparts. Think of all the teenage and early 20 something closeted gay men who went out with their straight mates and minded the drinks while their mates all scored around them. Who was more promiscuous then?

Maybe the delay in formative years has made some men make up for lost time in later years. I don't know but perceptions should be distinct from the truth.

Unfortunately, as they say in politics, perception is everything....!

eviltwin · 27-06-2014 10:16am

It's something I hear a lot - usually from people who don't know any gay men. Sure there are people out there who have lots of casual sex but you get that in the straight community too. What I don't understand is why its such a big deal? Who cares if someone is promiscuous, provided they are taking precautions.

J_E · 27-06-2014 11:27am

eviltwin wrote: »

It's something I hear a lot - usually from people who don't know any gay men. Sure there are people out there who have lots of casual sex but you get that in the straight community too. What I don't understand is why its such a big deal? Who cares if someone is promiscuous, provided they are taking precautions.

Well, barebacking culture is still worryingly normalised within certain areas of gay culture. That's definitely something to be concerned about.

Tombo2001 · 27-06-2014 11:30am

Lyaiera wrote: »

I read a New Yorker piece about gay marriage a while ago (I think it was New Yorker anyway.) The author had done a study on gay marriage and found gay men were more sexually active than their straight counterparts, however they were more monogomous happier once they became engaged or married. And even more they were far more open to sexual experimentation within marriages, so there were higher rates of consensual threesomes and swinging with fair less cheating and affairs.

What I got from it was that gay men seemed to be less sexually inhibited and therefore far more open about sexuality, both within and outside of marriage. And that there was a lot of mutual respect for people's decisions about their sexuality and committment.

The main study was about the effects of gay marriage on traditional marriage. It found that gay marriages were as stable as straight marriage, if not more so. And rather than weakening straight marriage the introduction of gay marriage saw a growth in straight marriage, a growth in the industry surrounding it and general attitudes towards marriage being more positive overall. And that included straight couples changing their opinion that marriage was an option for them when previously they were against it.

(There was also a large part of the article dedicated to lesbian behaviour but I can't recall it offhand. It's a great article and I posted about it in here at the time but I don't think many people read it.)

FYP

J_E · 27-06-2014 11:36am

Tombo2001 wrote: »

FYP

Not sure what you are insinuating there? Men aren't as happy outside of a monogamous relationship? A gay relationship is more likely to have elements of an open relationship anyway (more likely, not always) there are less hangups and inhibitions.

floggg · 27-06-2014 11:42am

Cydoniac wrote: »

Well, barebacking culture is still worryingly normalised within certain areas of gay culture. That's definitely something to be concerned about.

You'll note he made reference to the need to take precautions.

Of course irresponsible sexual practices are hardly confined to gay men (and women). While it's something that should be tackled within the gay community more, it's also something to be tacked within the general population.

J_E · 27-06-2014 11:46am

floggg wrote: »

You'll note he made reference to the need to take precautions.

That was the point of my post! There is a quite lax attitude to STIs given how easy it is to 'get rid of' in most cases. Surprised at the number of guys I talk to who enjoy sex with others but don't get tested on a regular basis, given that there are free ways to do it.

Ambersky · 27-06-2014 12:16pm

I agree with ongarboy about the thread title and truth and perception being two different questions. Also I dont particularly like the word promiscuous.

Ive noticed a few differences in the way the gay mens scene and the way the gay womens scene seems to operate worldwide. In general most cities dont seem to be able to support things like womens bath houses or saunas, at least not on a regular basis , run nightly as a women owned buisness the way gay men seem to.

There doesnt seem to be a working established womens version of something like Grindr. It seems to be much more difficult in any city or rural area I know of for women to find casual sexual partners. Ive worked with men, granted it was years ago, who seemed to be able to go out during their lunch break and have a quick hook up with a guy any time they liked. Thats just not possible for any women I know, in any city I know.

I am aware that there are several contributing factors that might make the things I mentioned more difficult on the womens scene. Out women are in a minority compared to the numbers of gay men so it may be more difficult to run viable businesses to cater to them but it also seems to be difficult to get even irregular sauna nights started or continued.
Then there is both womens social conditioning around sex coupled with the way women have been exploited in that area and our need to make sure it is our own needs that are being met. Then women need to make sure we are neither in danger physically or emotionally by casual hook ups, that it is genuine not a set up, consensual and safe.

So I dont know if gay men are any more "promiscuous", have a higher sex drive than women or not but consensual casual sexual encounters seem to me to be more available to gay men than gay women. Why do you think this is? Could it be that women do have a lower sex drive or is that financial, social and emotional influences, do over ride an equally strong sex drive.

J_E · 27-06-2014 12:50pm

It will be interesting to see if Dattch revolutionises dating and hookups for women like Grindr and its counterparts have for men.

door · 27-06-2014 1:53pm

It's only a false stereotype and I am disgusted with those who just place it on all gay people.

Ambersky · 27-06-2014 2:12pm

Had a look at the Dattch site, great writing and articles anyway, is the app working in Ireland?

brooke 2 · 27-06-2014 2:37pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

There is no doubt gay men are more sexually active. Men in general have a higher need for sex (biologically speaking), when you put two of them together, it's inevitable that stuff happens! It doesn't mean all men have such a sex drive though, and that's where those perceptions are damaging and wrong. If anything, it's more of a subtle sign that society at large still refuses to acknowledge female sexual activity on the same level and focus so much on men.

Isn't this the way the saying goes - 'Women usually need a reason to have sex;
men just need an opportunity.'!!

J_E · 27-06-2014 2:37pm

Ambersky wrote: »

Had a look at the Dattch site, great writing and articles anyway, is the app working in Ireland?

Seems to only be in UK/US so far, hopefully it extends.

door wrote: »

It's only a false stereotype and I am disgusted with those who just place it on all gay people.

Except it's not... Why disgusted? Nothing wrong with enjoying sex. The only issue is the finger wagging anti-gay people who thrive off shame.

brooke 2 · 27-06-2014 2:43pm

floggg wrote: »

Ironically if straight men stopped slut shaming so much they'd get it more often!

E.g. Friends of mine who don't see their own one night stands as indicating bad character on their part, but have said they would be unlikely to go out with a girl who participated in one with them as they wouldn't respect her if she engaged in casual sex.

Comes down to the physics of the entry process. Which would be valued more -
a key which can open 7/8/9, etc., locks or a lock which can be opened by any
number of keys????

J_E · 27-06-2014 2:45pm

brooke 2 wrote: »

Comes down to the physics of the entry process. Which would be valued more -
a key which can open 7/8/9, etc., locks or a lock which can be opened by any
number of keys????

Terrible comment to make.

door · 27-06-2014 2:56pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

Except it's not... Why disgusted? Nothing wrong with enjoying sex. The only issue is the finger wagging anti-gay people who thrive off shame.

Who said anything about not enjoying sex? I'm gay, very sexually active but I'm monogamous. Promiscuous people and consenting adults can do what they want but labelling all gay people, which is what I frequently hear, as promiscuous does disgust me because it conjures up an image of people incapable of showing true affection or love or any ability to express deep feelings or sensitivity to people they encounter for sexual or non-sexual relationships. This is my experience, it is my opinion and it why the stereotype of promiscuity disgusts me. I must add that I know more promiscuous straight people than gay people.

brooke 2 · 27-06-2014 3:30pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

Terrible comment to make.

Why?

It illustrates the time worn difference in attitudes towards the sexual
activity of men and women, as illustrated by a poster's comment re his
friend's one night stand, ie, it is OK for him to have one but he would not
have much regard for the girl who would have it with him!!!!

If you have read anything about the mother and baby scandals, you would see
that there is very little opprobrium piled on the fathers of these babies. Why
is that?

Annasopra · 27-06-2014 3:38pm

door wrote: »

Who said anything about not enjoying sex? I'm gay, very sexually active but I'm monogamous. Promiscuous people and consenting adults can do what they want but labelling all gay people, which is what I frequently hear, as promiscuous does disgust me because it conjures up an image of people incapable of showing true affection or love or any ability to express deep feelings or sensitivity to people they encounter for sexual or non-sexual relationships. This is my experience, it is my opinion and it why the stereotype of promiscuity disgusts me. Again for all the trolls who will attack my comments, they are my opinion based on my experiences. I must add that I know more promiscuous straight people than gay people.

Just because people disagree with you does not mean they are trolling

door · 27-06-2014 4:47pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Just because people disagree with you does not mean they are trolling

Edit: Despite the above initial comment I understand your point now. The original post regarding "trolls" was a bit off the cuff pre-defensive, which I have now removed in order to avoid the course of this thread going further askew.

J_E · 27-06-2014 5:24pm

brooke 2 wrote: »

Why?

Because women are not 'locks' that are spent after a few uses. The worst kind of objectification.

door wrote: »

Didn't say people who disagree with me are trolls, only said the trolls who *attack* my comments/opinion as if I'm not entitled to it. Big difference between disagreeing and attacking. I'm preempting the vile responses, not those who disagree. No need to be bold either

I'm not sure if this was aimed at me, I was certainly doing no such attacking anyway! I am of the opinion that while a relationship is nice, sexual encounters don't have to necessarily be 'disconnected' emotionally at all. I'm in a relationship now but I was just as happy out of one too, two different experiences. You can love many people in life and simply have a strong bond with someone without being in love. LGBT people make their own rules, why simply regard the heterosexual standard as the only life option? I'm going into territory that would probably suit the Humanities forum better though. I think the whole stereotype of gay men humping each other like animals all the time is obviously ridiculous, by the way.

floggg · 27-06-2014 6:17pm

door wrote: »

Didn't say people who disagree with me are trolls, only said the trolls who *attack* my comments/opinion as if I'm not entitled to it. Big difference between disagreeing and attacking. I'm preempting the vile responses, not those who disagree. No need to be bold either

Even an "attack" on your opinion doesn't affect or go to the issue of your entitlement to an opinion. The essence of free speech is that you are allowed to express your opinion freely. It doesn't however require that your opinion be respected, accepted, listened to/read or be free from ridicule or attacks. In fact free speech by it's nature requires that others be equally afforded to attack it if you so wish.

Ultimately the only time your entitlement to express an opinion would be called into question is if the state was trying to block you from expressing it (boards aren't necessarily required to give you a platform so can remove it if they wish).

For the record I would somewhat agree with your comments on the issue at hand, but I hate to see people who voluntarily contribute to a debate try to frame any negative response to their opinion as some form of attack on their right to express it.

door · 27-06-2014 6:39pm

floggg wrote: »

For the record I would somewhat agree with your comments on the issue at hand.

Cheers!

Regards the rest, I understand and accept your point. Pity one little side point in my post changed the course of this thread a bit though. I've edited my previous posts now to avoid this point going OT.

Scaldy Ned · 28-06-2014 1:26am

Hello all

Got drawn to this thread because even though i'm straight , my brother was gay...he died of a brain hemorrhage in London ten years ago . I would say that he was promiscuous and even though he would rightly argue that most straight men constantly think of sex it seemed to me that he could never switch off.....for example to watch a footie game or a good documentary etc.
I got to know all his friends and it's honest of me to say that every single conversation they ever had was always coded reference to gay sex.....Good luck to em is what i say , whatever floats your boat, i would say that gay men are definitely more promiscuous than straight men.
I personally think that it's a kickback to a society that shuns such things as gayness but i also think these attitudes are rightly changing and more and more straight people are learning to accept people for what they are. In answer to your question though , i would say yes ....Gay men are more promiscious

floggg · 28-06-2014 2:05am

Scaldy Ned wrote: »

Hello all

Got drawn to this thread because even though i'm straight , my brother was gay...he died of a brain hemorrhage in London ten years ago . I would say that he was promiscuous and even though he would rightly argue that most straight men constantly think of sex it seemed to me that he could never switch off.....for example to watch a footie game or a good documentary etc.
I got to know all his friends and it's honest of me to say that every single conversation they ever had was always coded reference to gay sex.....Good luck to em is what i say , whatever floats your boat, i would say that gay men are definitely more promiscuous than straight men.
I personally think that it's a kickback to a society that shuns such things as gayness but i also think these attitudes are rightly changing and more and more straight people are learning to accept people for what they are. In answer to your question though , i would say yes ....Gay men are more promiscious

Without being disrespectful towards your deceased brother (who I obviously didn't know):

(A) not every single conversation was about sex. It's just not possible - occasionally people need to talk about mundane **** too; and

(B) even if he was promiscuous as you seem to believe, he was one person. Gay people are still just people - we all differ. So regardless of the accuracy of your perceptions regarding your brother, they are only true for him and not for all gay people. We are not interchangeable.

J_E · 28-06-2014 4:34am

Scaldy Ned wrote: »

Hello all

Got drawn to this thread because even though i'm straight , my brother was gay...he died of a brain hemorrhage in London ten years ago . I would say that he was promiscuous and even though he would rightly argue that most straight men constantly think of sex it seemed to me that he could never switch off.....for example to watch a footie game or a good documentary etc.
I got to know all his friends and it's honest of me to say that every single conversation they ever had was always coded reference to gay sex.....Good luck to em is what i say , whatever floats your boat, i would say that gay men are definitely more promiscuous than straight men.
I personally think that it's a kickback to a society that shuns such things as gayness but i also think these attitudes are rightly changing and more and more straight people are learning to accept people for what they are. In answer to your question though , i would say yes ....Gay men are more promiscious

Hmmm...not sure this is exactly a fair account. Even the most sex-addled guys I know have other interests and hobbies, family life, work, etc. and it isn't a constant thing...I would say in the grand scale of things it was just a segment of their life like everyone else. Sure, they might have sexual jokes, but that doesn't actually mean they're thinking about sex itself at all. I don't know your brother better than you do though. Just think that's a little bit black and white.

Scaldy Ned · 28-06-2014 5:31am

I sometimes post in the "gay thread" because of my experiences with my brother and his friends , and it always seems that guys will come on and tell me that i have misread a situation or that i am being unfair in some way....Listen when i tell you that you could not boil an egg for my brother as breakfast but there would be some inuendo involved ...same goes for lunch , dinner ,supper and drinks later. When i was in the company of his friends absolutely everything was coded and i honestly cannot remember one conversation that did not eventually come round to "the scene" and what it involved....When my daughter was 6 , she bought him pink pound shop earings and jewelry.....such was the understanding in my family.
I'm not generalising as to how things are now but this is the way it was with my brother and most of his friends ....so sorry if you dont like it but tough titty it's the truth.....,every stereotype from John Inman to quentin crisp to the bull queers in shawshank redemption was true in my brothers case and it was all consuming .....if it's not like that for you so be it. But dont come on and tell me i'm mistaken or that it was black or white....i wish it was.....Unfortunately it was mostly grey tinged with pink

jill_valentine · 28-06-2014 5:51am

Conversations about why women don't seem to seek out casual sex via Grindr equivalents ought to take into account the fact that women have a justified distrust of them, and safety concerns which aren't necessarily echoed among gay men. Lesbian online communities, dating sites etc are riddled with creepy straight guys posing as lesbians. This is so widespread that it's not at all beyond the realms for two such guys to inadvertantly court each other, each believing the other was a lesbian, because all the actual lesbians realised something was off and steered clear.

Any Grindr style app would not only have to deal with that phenomenon effectively, it would also have to overcome that pretty universal negative prior experience in potential users.

baby and crumble · 28-06-2014 9:06am

Sex is a natural drive and desire for most people- and some individuals (regardless of gender) have a more active drive than others, but that doesn't mean they act upon it. And it particularly doesn't mean that they act upon it with multiple partners. Talking/ thinking/ fantasising about sex a lot doesn't make you promiscuous. (I hate that word anyway).

Like a lot of people here have said, there is less judgment of men having frequent sex, with multiple partners, regardless of orientation. So societal pressure doesn't exist as much for gay men. Neither partner in the sexual courtship (be it a 2 minute or 2 month courtship) has to manage that societal pressure that exists for women, even if women desire sex as much as they do.

J_E · 28-06-2014 11:10am

jill_valentine wrote: »

Lesbian online communities, dating sites etc are riddled with creepy straight guys posing as lesbians. This is so widespread that it's not at all beyond the realms for two such guys to inadvertantly court each other, each believing the other was a lesbian, because all the actual lesbians realised something was off and steered clear.

Oh god, that's insane. Are people really that sad and desperate? What an awful thing to have to deal with if you're dating...

eviltwin · 28-06-2014 11:58am

Cydoniac wrote: »

Oh god, that's insane. Are people really that sad and desperate? What an awful thing to have to deal with if you're dating...

I've seen straight men troll on women's health forums as females with an imaginary problem in order to engage other unsuspecting women in conversations about intimate issues, there is a whole lot of crazy out there

floggg · 28-06-2014 4:57pm

Scaldy Ned wrote: »

I sometimes post in the "gay thread" because of my experiences with my brother and his friends , and it always seems that guys will come on and tell me that i have misread a situation or that i am being unfair in some way....Listen when i tell you that you could not boil an egg for my brother as breakfast but there would be some inuendo involved ...same goes for lunch , dinner ,supper and drinks later. When i was in the company of his friends absolutely everything was coded and i honestly cannot remember one conversation that did not eventually come round to "the scene" and what it involved....When my daughter was 6 , she bought him pink pound shop earings and jewelry.....such was the understanding in my family.
I'm not generalising as to how things are now but this is the way it was with my brother and most of his friends ....so sorry if you dont like it but tough titty it's the truth.....,every stereotype from John Inman to quentin crisp to the bull queers in shawshank redemption was true in my brothers case and it was all consuming .....if it's not like that for you so be it. But dont come on and tell me i'm mistaken or that it was black or white....i wish it was.....Unfortunately it was mostly grey tinged with pink

The only contribution of yours I can remember was the thread you started when you wanted a replacement gay friend for your wife to take the place of your brother - in which you seemed to view us all as interchangeable objects that could be swapped in for each other like you would with a child's goldfish.

You're views on sexuality/LGBT people seem to he naive to say the least (which is the nice way of putting things).

Maybe your brother was as you describe him, but then he would be the exception rather than the rule. Your interactions with him don't seem to have given you the insight into LGBT people that you think they did.

suicide_circus · 29-06-2014 4:31am

Straight men not coming off well in this thread!

Mr.Frame · 29-06-2014 11:49am

suicide_circus wrote: »

Straight men not "coming off "well in this
thread!

>sniggers<

Locker10a · 29-06-2014 5:53pm

Scaldy Ned wrote: »

I sometimes post in the "gay thread" because of my experiences with my brother and his friends , and it always seems that guys will come on and tell me that i have misread a situation or that i am being unfair in some way....Listen when i tell you that you could not boil an egg for my brother as breakfast but there would be some inuendo involved ...same goes for lunch , dinner ,supper and drinks later. When i was in the company of his friends absolutely everything was coded and i honestly cannot remember one conversation that did not eventually come round to "the scene" and what it involved....When my daughter was 6 , she bought him pink pound shop earings and jewelry.....such was the understanding in my family.
I'm not generalising as to how things are now but this is the way it was with my brother and most of his friends ....so sorry if you dont like it but tough titty it's the truth.....,every stereotype from John Inman to quentin crisp to the bull queers in shawshank redemption was true in my brothers case and it was all consuming .....if it's not like that for you so be it. But dont come on and tell me i'm mistaken or that it was black or white....i wish it was.....Unfortunately it was mostly grey tinged with pink

Your brother and his friends do not represent the vast majority of gay men. period.
You are not a liar, at all, I totally believe what you are saying, but it sounds like you have had close involvement with guys who are living in a bubble world a sort of scene within the scene situation and are not a representative sample of the gay population. If you think the majority of gay men are like your brother you are mistaken

Is there some truth to the perception that gay men are promiscuous?

Comments