Promiscuity

[bluefox4000]

No you need to change it back to gay guys! thats not true

It IS a human thing. whether you admit it or not we fight against our makeup every day. we are not meant to be monogamous.

Mick

[bluefox4000]

rather a cynical default

Rather true. Fact that we can be monogamous is great though. We are still going against instinct though.

Mick

[trialbyerror]

Just a few points.

What is the difference between whore and liking (or needing) a lot of sex?

My opinion: -
If liking (or for that matter needing) a lot of sex is destructive (to anything or anybody) then that is a being a whore.

To me, a prostitute is also by definition, not a whore. There is a whole different dynamic there, mainly survival... Who is anybody to judge?

If it does not harm then why condemn or be judgmental? Live and let live

Is liking / needing a lot of sex a character fault? I don't think so. Sex is good, healthy, and very nice thank you. It's meant to be nice, its the way people are wired since before homo-sapiens.

Yes I agree, woman would tend to be more picky and choosy. Nature's evolved that way. The male provides and protects the lady nurtures.. (Generalisation again please)

I would also want a big strong provider who's more likely to produce big strong children, and in today's selection game, clever has also crept into the equation.

So yes, I think woman are less likely to engage in sex with multiple partners, than men, and yes I think that the fact that the lady is more likely to get burdened with a child (the guy can always just walk away, and often does..:mad does decrease the number of different partners...

With 2 guys, I don't think that dynamic plays that much of a role until perhaps it comes to partnering :eek:

Males are wired to spread their genes as wide as possible (just observe our animal life),

By example
Male lions who take over a pride by ousting the previous male (usually by killing) will commit infanticide to bring the lioness into season, as the lioness will only come into season once the cubs are mature enough to take care of themselves. (they wanna get on and do the spreading of genes thingie)

Studies in Africa have documented that the prevalence of male lions teaming up to dominate a pride has also increased. It is a successful breeding strategy, even though there are 2 males involved,
1) They breed for longer
2) they control & protect bigger prides
3) they can control bigger territory to provide more hunting opportunities for their pride

(Bigger, stronger, spread seed more often)

So yes, I think that the generalisation would be, that gay men want to have sex more often and with more multiple partners, but probably it's mostly a case of wham-bam-thanks-man.

But everybody's dynamics and motivations are different so frequency, multiplicity, roles, are all inputs and at the end of the day, who's gonna be stupid enough to try to hold the moral high ground... Definitely not me.

If I eva find another partner, I will define my relationship with that person and his dynamics, and the rest of the world can simply butt out. It will be right for me and him

Food for thought???

[MisterTinkles]

Why are some gay guys exceedingly promiscuous, and other gay guys are not? I know you could say “well that goes for straight people as well” but with homosexuals, you tend to notice it a lot more. Its almost as if romance died a long damn time ago, and took dignity with it.

Its one of those "50/50" things.

I have found that gay guys either are whores, or they are monogamous....no in-between.

Unfortunately, all the monogamous ones seem to want the whores.....then they sit there and whine and bitch about what a whore he is, instead of looking for a decent monogamous guy.

[Sleepyface]

Well put Mr. Tinkles Best answer yet.

[Matty71]

I like romance and would need that in any relationship, first. Sex is secondary for me. I also prefer monogamy and would need that.

[Pix]

Generally speaking and in my observation the monogamous gay guys who get the whores make the same mistake as the straight women who have the same problem. They don't pursue anyone, instead they wait while fantasizing about who they want. And then a player/whore spots them as they're cruising for more tail and introduces themselves with their game, and the fools are so eager to believe their own fantasy that they buy into the calculating player who plays them and are then used and discarded (or as long until the victim gets a spine, a clue, and/or some self-respect and gets rid of them without going back to them later).

[Pix]

Men are more sexual because that's in their nature. Men spread their seed, women raise the children. Not saying that's what it's like or should be like (obviously), but that's how nature designed us, no? I definitely think it's easier to find a willing guy than to find a willing girl. For casual sex, that is. Obviously there are exceptions, but I think generally that's the way it is.

I could be wrong, though. This is just the conclusion I draw from my own experiences and things I hear from other people.

I believe it's a bit of A and B. Society does urge men to be players and I do believe some are obnoxious that way simply trying to live up to expectations just as some women are very careful to protect their reputation by means fair and foul as they sleep around. But I do think men have less of a nesting instinct (at least until older) and so are much easier into casual sex at first. Of course not worrying about things like pregnancy is another thing (I know *I* certainly worried about it when I fooled around with a guy and when I think of the problems that could come with being raped).

OTOH, society can push men and women the opposite way (religious orders, hippie communes, etc), and all the services available to women in Sweden seems to have done a lot to make them more open to it. And I suspect sex is so bad for so many straight women that they give up on it pretty fast as not worth it and do it more for obligation as well as some instinctive drive to find what they know they're missing. That is, IF it was a better experience for them then they'd be a lot more into it than they are (again, generally speaking here).

I read somewhere that the number of straight women (including married with children) who had never had an orgasm by age 30 was incredibly high while bisexual and lesbian women had nearly all had orgasms by then. If sex is awkward, unpleasant, possibly painful as she's not aroused (it's amazing how many men, and even a few women, think a woman is "automatically ready" for a penis without arousal!) with social condemnation and health risks on top of that in which THEY will be blamed (for example, Kristen Stewart is the "trampire" while the older, married family man who is also her director hardly gets even a hint of criticism!) then I can understand why plenty of straight women would give up on it.

[Pix]

[Vigilias]

LOL, Dreamer, you have no soul! Pretty accurate though!

My take on the situation:

Heterosexual folk have at one half of their equation the female sex drive, which I understand is not as "press-the-button-and-off-you-go" as the male libido, therefore the guy has to wait a little while. I suppose the difference between a microwave and a conventional oven.

The very "Oven-Ready" sex drive in us guys can often get in the way of romance - I think.

I've done a bit of youth work and had younger gay male friends and the one thing I always advised/suggested as a way to tell if a guy was interested in the person or just the sex was not to rush in to sex but to wait and see if the other guy came back after a date or two.

Asking a teen-age gay guy to delay sax is a bit like asking birds not to fly.

*Sigh... they rarely if ever listen to their wise old auntie Vig!