Why are gay guys so promiscuous?

[franklinP]

Yeah, it's definitely just guys in general. You're not alone though, so don't give up! Good relationships are hard to find, regardless of sexual orientation.

I totally agree with you.

 

[bankside]

To put my point above in more musical terms, the lyrics of the song are:

I want to fuck you like an animal
I want to feel you from the inside

But a certain sect of feminists like to believe the lyrics are:

I am about to fuck you like an animal
I'm going to feel you from the inside whether you agree or not because I am a man and That's How Men Are™
(Song degenerates into men shouting "Arrrr arrrr arrrr" like Tim Allen in Home Improvement.)

 

[FlimFlam]

Quoted for truth. Let these fools know.






As for the question, it's a slap in the face to gay men who aren't promiscuous to ask questions like these. Personally, I'm promiscuous because I have absolutely no time or desire to search endlessly for someone to fall in love with, and I'm not going to fake it with someone just so I can bust a nut.

And those are the only two scenarios?

 

[xbuzzerx]

Then why the big push for marriage equality if gay men seldom want it?

Because as things like joint property and medical considerations and the sharing of money become pertinent in a relationship, even guys who may not necessarily have had the wedding chapel in their eyes at 22 may want to legalize their relationship at 32 or 42 or 52, and should have every equal right to do so. Some straight people never wanting to get married (my sister is in that camp) should still have access to the same rights should she ever choose to do so.

Oh, I thought it was because of love and commitment. My bad, I guess.

Sixthson I have bad news. Marriage 500 years ago was a contract. Marriage today is still a contract. You do not need a marriage for "love and commitment."

 

[Adrock-JD]

It's in our jeans.

 

[eastofeden]

Because as things like joint property and medical considerations and the sharing of money become pertinent in a relationship, even guys who may not necessarily have had the wedding chapel in their eyes at 22 may want to legalize their relationship at 32 or 42 or 52, and should have every equal right to do so. Some straight people never wanting to get married (my sister is in that camp) should still have access to the same rights should she ever choose to do so.

Marriage 500 years ago was a contract. Marriage today is still a contract. You do not need a marriage for "love and commitment."

YES! I think the main reason I will not consider "marriage" is because nearly everyone has endlessly tried to define it and the last thing I would want to do is embrace such an oppressive institution. For me marriage IS a contract and defining my relationship within that contract is my business and no one else's.

Sadly...it turns out that many gay men are as much marriage mafia material as so many of the straight counterparts and some of them sound exactly like the moral majority of the 70s...judging other people's relationships as worthy or not...UGH.

 

[sixthson]

Sixthson I have bad news. Marriage 500 years ago was a contract. Marriage today is still a contract. You do not need a marriage for "love and commitment."

Thank you for enlightening me.

 

[Rolyo85]

Thank you for enlightening me.

You seemed like you needed it. Love and commitment are a great thing for marriage, but they don't need marriage to exist and marriage doesn't need them to exist.

 

[eastofeden]

So I'm familiar with the general observance that many men have a high sex drive. It's amazing though how many people out there don't even seem to be interested in relationships. I've kind of re-entered the looking around market and am really looking for a relationship. I've never really had a whore phase and don't intend to. I'm the type that could easily be happy cuddling and kissing with a partner all day rather than having sex every 5 minutes.

However, it seems like everyone I talk to, whether it be from gay apps like Grindr or Growlr (granted promiscuity is almost a given on these things), in real life, or from dating websites, it seems like just about everyone just wants a hookup. I've even seen a surprisingly high number of people in open relationships looking to have random sex (something I can't even start to comprehend how it could possibly work in the long run.)

Is this representative of the majority of the gay community? Are committed relationships (or at least people out looking for them) just not commonplace? Am I on a hopeless mission to find someone to want to be in a monogamous relationship with? What are people's thoughts on this?

I was promiscuous as hell...been with over 500 but under 1000 guys...and my problem was staying OUT OF relationships. I couldn't outrun them though and have been with the same man for almost 27 years....so it isn't an either/or for me. I am also really happy about my "whore days"...no hand wringing or sorrow.

I am wondering if you know where the bridge is between promiscuity and relationships because if you find it you might have alot better luck.

The key IMO is to avoid "church lady syndrome". Church Ladies like to get together and talk about the things they wouldn't do and how they are above it all...and are slightly more moral and infinitely more "correct" than "the others". Their relationships and desires are "pure and holy" while they tsk tsk or condemn the people who are not like them as somehow lesser beings.

Just an FYI...I can think of 20 gay couples off the top of my head I personally know that have been together 20-40 years and they are all committed in their relationships...and lots of them were whores once upon a time.

 

[Ryuukie]

I've always believed that if you're looking for a relationship you'll never find one. It's when you're not looking for love and instead look to meet new friends that one of those friendship will ignite into a relationship.

 

[xbuzzerx]

I've always believed that if you're looking for a relationship you'll never find one. It's when you're not looking for love and instead look to meet new friends that one of those friendship will ignite into a relationship.

This, this, this. I've never found one while looking for one. People who are all over hookup aps and such every night are less likely to find one than someone who wasn't looking. At least that's been my overwhelming experience.

 

[kayman23]

Yes, we live in a world where women are sometimes pathologised simply for exercising their right to autonomy and consent. Yes, we live in a world where the enthusiastic consent of women is sometimes stigmatised. No, women do not have a duty to "lie back and think of England."

But the post you were responding to was not at odds with any of that: that post is primarily a charge of hypocrisy.

We live in a world where sometimes women who want to have consensual sex shame men who want to have consensual sex by portraying them as out-of-control rape-y misogynists who can't manage their own sexuality.

And that charge is valid. It is the way in which slut-shaming of men is conducted.

And how often does that happen? I've seen more slut-shaming conducted by men to other men, particularly with men-whom-sleep-with-other-men (MSM), than women that does such to men. Take a gander at any personal ads on some hook up or gay social media sites personal sections, and read some of these profiles on those type of sites.

As matter of fact, patriarchal hold on westernized society makes it very difficult (almost damn near impossible) for misandry versus misogyny (which has even shown its present on this board).

 

[kayman23]

Quoted for truth. Let these fools know.






As for the question, it's a slap in the face to gay men who aren't promiscuous to ask questions like these. Personally, I'm promiscuous because I have absolutely no time or desire to search endlessly for someone to fall in love with, and I'm not going to fake it with someone just so I can bust a nut.

Well, I hope you enjoy having to go to the "happy clinic" multiple times a year for your regular "clearance". That shit got old real quickly...

 

[eastofeden]

And how often does that happen? I've seen more slut-shaming conducted by men to other men, particularly with men-whom-sleep-with-other-men (MSM), than women that does such to men.

Wow! I had never heard the term "slut shaming" before but that is the main underlying reason I left the last and only gay board I was on (plus one of the loudest slut shamers was creepy as hell) and why I was reluctant to join another one but since this one has porn there is much less of it here.

When I worked in a gay bar I would avoid the slut shamers because there is usually so much other crap that goes along with that mindset (control freaks from hell is what I used to call them)

 

[Telstra]

Because it is not "normal" to get married.
That is why.


I wonder how many % of gays are married and how many are single.

 

[blackbeltninja]

You seemed like you needed it. Love and commitment are a great thing for marriage, but they don't need marriage to exist and marriage doesn't need them to exist.

Because as things like joint property and medical considerations and the sharing of money become pertinent in a relationship.

Marriage 500 years ago was a contract. Marriage today is still a contract. You do not need a marriage for "love and commitment."

These two viewpoints don't add up.

I'm certainly not going to get into a joint property-owing venture and shared medical insurance with someone I'm neither in love with nor committed to; I doubt anyone else is, either. Likewise, I wouldn't marry someone unless I was in love with or committed to them, or my name was Gerard Depardieu and I was in a film with Andie MacDowell at the time.

If I were investing in shared property, shared expenses or tax-dodging with someone else's medical aid as a capital venture, it would be done as a legal process the business way. Not the marriage way.

-d-

 

[kayman23]

Because it is not "normal" to get married.
That is why.


I wonder how many % of gays are married and how many are single.

And how exactly does that legitimizes being a big ol' ho-bag?

Just because food is extremely accessible in most westernized nations doesn't mean we ought to eat all the time. Overeating/binge eating brings a heap loads of health problems, and the same analogy along with similar results can be applied to sex.

 

[bankside]

These two viewpoints don't add up.

I'm certainly not going to get into a joint property-owing venture and shared medical insurance with someone I'm neither in love with nor committed to; I doubt anyone else is, either. Likewise, I wouldn't marry someone unless I was in love with or committed to them, or my name was Gerard Depardieu and I was in a film with Andie MacDowell at the time.

If I were investing in shared property, shared expenses or tax-dodging with someone else's medical aid as a capital venture, it would be done as a legal process the business way. Not the marriage way.

-d-

Yup. All of the above.

 

[Adrock-JD]

Why is promiscuity a negative for gay guys but a positive for straight ones?

Why do straight promiscuous guys get labelled "stud" and "heartbreaker" and gay guys get labelled the same as promiscuous women; sluts and whores. We aren't women. Is everyone assuming we only sleep with straight guys? wtf? It makes no sense.

I don't think it's fair to label women that way either but I'm just saying that's obviously where it's derived.

 

[xbuzzerx]

These two viewpoints don't add up.

I'm certainly not going to get into a joint property-owing venture and shared medical insurance with someone I'm neither in love with nor committed to; I doubt anyone else is, either. Likewise, I wouldn't marry someone unless I was in love with or committed to them, or my name was Gerard Depardieu and I was in a film with Andie MacDowell at the time.

If I were investing in shared property, shared expenses or tax-dodging with someone else's medical aid as a capital venture, it would be done as a legal process the business way. Not the marriage way.

-d-

Yup. All of the above.

You two are being rather thick. (Bankside, shame on you for twice in two topics.)

You don't know any married couples who have fallen out of love? You don't know any married couples who have had infidelity issues? Even if you don't, they exist. But regardless of those two states of affairs, the contract remains unless legally ended. If you posit that somehow gay men don't "deserve" the status of legally married until they've proven some intangible litmus of love and commitment, where is the proposition to somehow legally enforce that statute on heterosexual married couples? And how many would pass it?