Prevelant problems within gay society?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Wittlich
Or the laws that don't recognise a gay relationship as a real relationship in the first place.

I have had a relationship with another guy and it was more stable than anything my striaght friends had. I miss him... well I had to move.

Anyways, sweeping generalizations like "all males are promiscious" is not true. There are many who are not promiscious.

[Wittlich]

I agree Fez.

[Giancarlo]

Is that a first time?

[Wittlich]

My God! I do believe it is the first time!

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Wittlich
My God! I do believe it is the first time!

Well we got similiarities... However few.. there are some...

[MrFun]

When you moved, did you bring your helicopter with you, Fez?

[Clear Skies]

Will&Grace is dropping off recently. The 80s flashback episodes were good, but it's getting shallower and shallower. These days I find myself looking forward to it ending so I can get on with watching Scrubs.

[Wittlich]

Clear Skies - What does your last post have to do with prevelant problems within the gay society...or gay life in general? I understand the gay connection with Will & Grace....and possibly stretch it for That's 70's / That's 80's episodes ... but Scrubs?!? I agree that it is a good show...but where does it fit into the gay society?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not finding fault or anything...it's just that your last post was (as I see it) far in left field.

[Clear Skies]

I'm so far in left field I couldn't catch a ball if my arms were ten feet long.
And it was just a muse in reference to a quote posted a few pages or so ago. My bad.

[Boris Godunov]

If we want to complain about gay tv, I'd start with the U.S. QAF. Blech.

[Adam Smith]

I will be the first to admit that there are plenty of things I don’t understand about Gay issues. Here are half a dozen questions I can think of off the top of my head. This thread seems as good a place as any to ask these questions, and I would be interested to hear people’s views.

I understand that there civil benefits attached to the institution of marriage. Inheritance and health care benefits are two obvious ones. If marriage is defined for civil purposes as the union of two heterosexuals, then I can see how homosexuals would feel discriminated against. There could certainly be civil remedies for this situation, though one could wonder whether gay or straight people should be getting married for the health benefits.

According to my wife (a physician who works with genetic diseases), the odds of a person being homosexual depend on a number of factors including, in the case of gays for example, how many males there are in the family already. What other genetic factors are there? How do they apply in your case?

A friend who has volunteered at a Gay Help Line in Chicago for more than 20 years tells me that aside from “coming out”, the most defining Gay experience is determining one’s “type” i.e., the physical type of person one is attracted to. According to my friend, a gay person would not be attracted to or have a relationship with just any man, but only a man of this particular “type”. Thinking of the heterosexual analog, I could see that someone might be more sexually attracted to a person with certain physical characteristics, but I can think of few if any heterosexuals who would say they could only marry a red head. Does this mean that sexual attraction plays a larger or dominant role in gay and lesbian relationships than it does in heterosexual ones? As one person put it, “Is it all about sex?“

This same friend, who has counseled people about the risks of AIDS and appropriate prevention told me that he himself engaged in risky sexual behavior on several occasions. To what extent do people engage in risky sexual behavior even when they have full knowledge? Do we have a realistic prospect of (largely) eliminating AIDS / HIV?

To what extent are the problems faced by Gays also faced by other people in society? A couple years ago I had a discussion with Mindseye in which he listed the problems he faced. One annoyance was that people kept asking him when he would get married. Since I did not get married until I was 37, I heard this question a lot. And I relied on the one size fits all no matter what sexual orientation answer: “I will get married when I find the right person.” In other words, are civil remedies likely to work, or a homosexuals and heterosexuals simple on other planets?

Christian denominations consider certain sexual practices (e.g., group sex, multiple sexual partners) to be wrong regardless of whether conducted by heterosexuals or homosexuals. The rationale is often that such practices can lead to people being reduced to sex objects. Homosexuals may engage in these practices more than heterosexuals. But if the same standard is applied to both groups, is the standard discriminatory, even if it seems a harsh standard to some people?

[Asher]

I'm afraid I can't give you any real answers, because everyone is different. So I'll answer from my P.O.V....

Originally posted by Adam Smith
According to my wife (a physician who works with genetic diseases), the odds of a person being homosexual depend on a number of factors including, in the case of gays for example, how many males there are in the family already. What other genetic factors are there? How do they apply in your case?

I'm not sure why I'm what I am. I've got one other brother in the family (younger) but he's never been overly masculine, and neither has my father. I don't know of any other gay people in my family, at all, and neither do my parents. I don't act gay in the flamboyant sense whatsoever, I'm completely "straight-acting", and I've liked guys for as long as I can remember.

A friend who has volunteered at a Gay Help Line in Chicago for more than 20 years tells me that aside from “coming out”, the most defining Gay experience is determining one’s “type” i.e., the physical type of person one is attracted to. According to my friend, a gay person would not be attracted to or have a relationship with just any man, but only a man of this particular “type”. Thinking of the heterosexual analog, I could see that someone might be more sexually attracted to a person with certain physical characteristics, but I can think of few if any heterosexuals who would say they could only marry a red head. Does this mean that sexual attraction plays a larger or dominant role in gay and lesbian relationships than it does in heterosexual ones? As one person put it, “Is it all about sex?“

I would say it's not too different from heterosexuals. I'm not really attracted to overly muscular guys, overweight guys, underweight guys, and overly effeminite guys. All of the straight guys I know have similar feelings towards women (who wants to go out with one of those women with 7" biceps?)

This same friend, who has counseled people about the risks of AIDS and appropriate prevention told me that he himself engaged in risky sexual behavior on several occasions. To what extent do people engage in risky sexual behavior even when they have full knowledge? Do we have a realistic prospect of (largely) eliminating AIDS / HIV?

Everyone I know practices safe sex, even in monogamous relationships and after they've both tested negative. The biggest problem is making people realize that condoms should be used with oral sex, as well.

[red_jon]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
I understand that there civil benefits attached to the institution of marriage. Inheritance and health care benefits are two obvious ones. If marriage is defined for civil purposes as the union of two heterosexuals, then I can see how homosexuals would feel discriminated against. There could certainly be civil remedies for this situation, though one could wonder whether gay or straight people should be getting married for the health benefits.

It's not just health benefits, etc, but many things. An importantone being haing no rights to access to the parnter - if they get sick, a gay partner can't visit. If they die, the partner has no say in funeral arrangements, etc.

According to my wife (a physician who works with genetic diseases), the odds of a person being homosexual depend on a number of factors including, in the case of gays for example, how many males there are in the family already. What other genetic factors are there? How do they apply in your case?

I have no idea as to what causes it. I only know it cannot be changed by coercion, however much you want it to.

According to my friend, a gay person would not be attracted to or have a relationship with just any man, but only a man of this particular “type”. ... Does this mean that sexual attraction plays a larger or dominant role in gay and lesbian relationships than it does in heterosexual ones? As one person put it, “Is it all about sex?“

I don't think any gay people would only marry someone of a certain hair colour or the like. I don't really have any 'type' aside from the usual type young people are attracted to - not too fat, too old, etc. The same way a straight guy is with girls really, however superficial that may sem.

This same friend, who has counseled people about the risks of AIDS and appropriate prevention told me that he himself engaged in risky sexual behavior on several occasions. To what extent do people engage in risky sexual behavior even when they have full knowledge? Do we have a realistic prospect of (largely) eliminating AIDS / HIV?

I'm personally paranoid about STIs and do not have unprotected sex. Usually I just engage in 'behavior' which doesn't carry any risk of STI transferral. I do have gay friends who are reckless in regards to sex, but then again I have straight friends who are the same.

To what extent are the problems faced by Gays also faced by other people in society? A couple years ago I had a discussion with Mindseye in which he listed the problems he faced. One annoyance was that people kept asking him when he would get married. Since I did not get married until I was 37, I heard this question a lot. And I relied on the one size fits all no matter what sexual orientation answer: “I will get married when I find the right person.” In other words, are civil remedies likely to work, or a homosexuals and heterosexuals simple on other planets?

Someday I may get married, but only to a guy. An annyoing thing is a belief that its a 'phase'. A surprising amount of people seem to thing that homosexuality isn't a permanent thing. I've been gay since I hit puberty and started being attracted to people and have never once been sttracted to a women. Yet to some people, it's a phase. Oh well, they'll be waiting a long time.

Christian denominations consider certain sexual practices (e.g., group sex, multiple sexual partners) to be wrong regardless of whether conducted by heterosexuals or homosexuals. The rationale is often that such practices can lead to people being reduced to sex objects. Homosexuals may engage in these practices more than heterosexuals. But if the same standard is applied to both groups, is the standard discriminatory, even if it seems a harsh standard to some people?

I'd be too self conscious for group sex to be honest. If someone wants to be promisqious as long as they're playing safe more power to 'em - as long as they're not doing it for the wrong reasons (such as trying to validate themselves, boost self esteem, etc).

Hope I could help

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
If we want to complain about gay tv, I'd start with the U.S. QAF. Blech.

Ladies and gentlemen, an example of someone who does not know good television when he sees it.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
I don't think it's a "perpetual adolescent" attitude so much as an "exclusively male" attitude. Among straight males in non-sexual situations, men will be boys...

Hell, I think we'd all like to be adolescent again, at times.

I think there is something to that. I also think that once you've decided there's nothbing special in the taboo of man with woman, it's pretty easy to decide that monagamy is a taboo as well.

[TCO]

Originally posted by red_jon
I've only ever had full sex with one person - who was my boyfriend and we were in a stable, monogamous relationship.

I just do things were there is no danger of transmission (if that's not too much information )

that is a change. You should have posted a thread to keep me informed.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Wittlich


Chegitz .................................................. ................ never mind, I'll let that one pass - though it is such a tempting target, I'll be good.

I'm curious about this.

[Giancarlo]

Redfern while we are on this subject, you see those pictures I posted of myself a while ago in that leather jacket?

[Asher]

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD

[Giancarlo]

[red_jon]

Originally posted by TCO


that is a change. You should have posted a thread to keep me informed.

I wasn't posting on Poly at the time - the internet nills we had to pay for our dorms on campus meant I couldn't do anything as time consuming as poly

I didn't see any major difference, it wasn't Earth shattering or anything. But I miss bieng anble to say I'm a virgin

Fez - no I haven't. I only just came back to poly a coupla days ago.

[mindseye]

Hi, Adam! Good questions!

though one could wonder whether gay or straight people should be getting married for the health benefits.

There are very important matters of benefits, but also there is the huge issue of respect and legitimacy in the eyes of one's community. That's why the "separate but equal" solution of "domestic partners" doesn't cut it for many. As Andrew Sullivan memorably put it, "it's just a finer form of discrimination."

What other genetic factors are there? How do they apply in your case?

I do not believe anyone yet has much of a clue as to what factors are involved, or even the how much is due to genetics versus environment. However, a good place to start might be a case study of my lesbian friend who has a lesbian sister. They grew up next door to a gay man with four gay sons (from an earlier marriage).

A friend tells me that aside from “coming out”, the most defining Gay experience is determining one’s “type”

A lot of gay people become hopelessly pre-occupied with figuring out what "type" they are and what they are into, whether it's a look, a race, an age, a sexual preference ("top", "bottom", or "versatile"), etc. I think westerners, especially Americans, spend far too much time trying to force themselves into artificial pigeonholes fabricated out of our desire to analyze and organize.

Does this mean that sexual attraction plays a larger or dominant role in gay and lesbian relationships than it does in heterosexual ones? As one person put it, “Is it all about sex?“

Well, there is the business of some feeling that they are sexually "passive" or "active", which may be a very important criteria in choosing a spouse if you are feel that you are exclusively one or the other. With straights, biology naturally sorts this one out, for gays it can be more complex.

To what extent do people engage in risky sexual behavior even when they have full knowledge?

The extent is in direct proportion to their idiocy.

A couple years ago I had a discussion with Mindseye in which he listed the problems he faced. One annoyance was that people kept asking him when he would get married.

I remember that conversation! Wow, I thought that problem was bad then, if only I could have known how much worse it would be in China! As you know, it's unusual to be over thirty and single here, so I'm constantly asked why I'm unmarried and if I like Shanghainese girls. I like your answer, I think I'll start using it!

But if the same standard is applied to both groups, is the standard discriminatory, even if it seems a harsh standard to some people?

I think it's very, very hard to define standards of sexual activity for any given community, outside of the broadest and most obvious (e.g. sex with children is a bad thing). I think people need the freedom to decide for themselves whether or not a particular behavior or lifestyle is demeaning. Personally, I can't begin to understand many sexual practices (e.g. "water sports") practiced by gays as well as straights. But I wouldn't dream of trying to force my "standard" on someone else's private sexual activity.

Any plans yet to bring your daughters for a visit to the Motherland?

[TCO]

Originally posted by red_jon



I wasn't posting on Poly at the time - the internet nills we had to pay for our dorms on campus meant I couldn't do anything as time consuming as poly

I didn't see any major difference, it wasn't Earth shattering or anything. But I miss bieng anble to say I'm a virgin

Fez - no I haven't. I only just came back to poly a coupla days ago.

dogpile!!!

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by red_jon

Fez - no I haven't. I only just came back to poly a coupla days ago.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=89351

[MrFun]

I would like one of the moderators to close this thread now. I think it has been spammed out.

[TCO]

Well tough ****. You don't own the thread. We can all post here. I don't buy that crap about the threadstarter getting some special right to close th thread when he doesn't like where it is going.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by TCO
Well tough ****. You don't own the thread. We can all post here. I don't buy that crap about the threadstarter getting some special right to close th thread when he doesn't like where it is going.

Well tough ****, I own the thread, and the tradition usually goes that the starter can ask for his/her thread to be closed.

[TCO]

you don't own the thread. you own your posts. you prissy little...grrr....restraint.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by MrFun
I would like one of the moderators to close this thread now. I think it has been spammed out.

I think it has very little spam...

[MrFun]

Well, ok -- looking back, I suppose this thread still meets my standards.