Bill Nye The Idiot Guy

[Sparko]

Homosexual men are famously promiscuous, a fact that became well-known with onset of AIDs, when studies of gay men who were HIV positive revealed average numbers of partners in the hundreds (and even though gay men who were HIV negative had much lower numbers, the average for them was still dramatically higher than the average numbers for heterosexual men)"


https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-queer-problem

[HMS_Beagle]

Homosexual men are famously promiscuous, a fact that became well-known with onset of AIDs, when studies of gay men who were HIV positive revealed average numbers of partners in the hundreds (and even though gay men who were HIV negative had much lower numbers, the average for them was still dramatically higher than the average numbers for heterosexual men)"

That's the same study already posted referring to the same almost 40 year old heavily criticized data by Bell and Weinberg.

[Sparko]

That's the same study already posted referring to the same almost 40 year old heavily criticized data by Bell and Weinberg.

He doesn't mention which study, but he does say "studies" plural, and as a homosexual man he doesn't seem to question the results. You would think if they were so wrong he would be all over that?

[Darth Executor]

The simple fact is males in general (gay or straight) tend to be much more promiscuous than females. Being gay or straight doesn't really factor into the equation.

Of course it does. Even if this was the sole reason for gay male promiscuity, it would mean women naturally act as a buffer from self-destructive male behavior. A buffer that homosexuality eliminates.

This is what happens when you're dumb and don't think your arguments through (because you come up with them on the spot to defend your fellow degenerates).

[HMS_Beagle]

Of course it does. Even if this was the sole reason for gay male promiscuity, it would mean women naturally act as a buffer from self-destructive male behavior. A buffer that homosexuality eliminates.

Which doesn't make gay men inherently more promiscuous than hetero men. It just means they have more of a chance to act on their inclinations that straight men do.

That's what happens when you're too stupid to understand the data and use the "all gays are promiscuous" false stereotype as a gay-bashing tool.

[seer]

You ignored this from your own link regarding your almost 40 year old data.

Gay men are no more promiscuous than hetero men. People who claim differently are either woefully ignorant or lying.

Well do you have a better study? And are you suggesting that homosexual men are less promiscuous now because they are afraid of dying?

[Starlight]

I seem to recall one of the nutty conservatives on this site was arguing that lesbian women were immensely promiscuous. Can't remember if it was you, MM, or Adrift. It seems like you guys can't even agree among yourselves on a day to day basis as to which particular false claims you want to smear gay people with. Sad!

[Starlight]

To understand why such work is simply not relevant any more, you need to consider the social dynamics of the pre-gay-rights era.

During that time, due to the high social stigma and prejudice associated with homosexuality, anyone who could hide their sexuality, was hiding it. In practice this meant that the majority of gay men pretended to be heterosexual, and many of those with a low libido remained single, while many others tried to have opposite sex marriages (which generally seem to have turned out unenjoyable and unsuccessful for all involved, and all too often the wife wasn't told up-front - and sadly "is my husband gay?" remains a common google search in conservative America). The group who were openly gay in spite of the social pressures and prejudices and stigmas, were the tiny fraction of gay men whose sexual desires were so strong that they had to act. These men lived in a culture that refused to recognize any value to their relationships, offering them no support to them whatsoever in terms of helping them maintain monogamous relationships or praising them for doing so.

So when social scientists studied this group, who were they studying? They certainly weren't studying men with same-sex attraction in general - most of those were hiding it from the world. They were studying a tiny fraction of unusual gay men who couldn't hide it because their sexual drives were so strong, these were the 1% as it were and not the 99% who were in hiding. So the scientists studied what they could, which happened to be an tiny and unusual group of gay men who weren't acting like the vast majority of gay men at the time were. It's the equivalent of going to the center of Los Vegas and doing a study there on the sexual behavior of straight men... the results are very much not representative of the population in general.

[seer]

To understand why such work is simply not relevant any more, you need to consider the social dynamics of the pre-gay-rights era.

Oh please, in the end I could care less. Homosexual acts, like adultery, incest or bestiality are immoral in themselves.

[Sea of red]

Isn't okcupid a dating site? Besides I can imagine the push back if anyone published a study that even suggested that homosexuals were more promiscuous.

1968?

Are the Beatles invading in your world still?

[Sea of red]

He doesn't mention which study, but he does say "studies" plural, and as a homosexual man he doesn't seem to question the results. You would think if they were so wrong he would be all over that?

So if I can find a Christian that states Christians are promiscuous will you accept it as true?

[Darth Executor]

Which doesn't make gay men inherently more promiscuous than hetero men. It just means they have more of a chance to act on their inclinations that straight men do.

No, it just makes them inherently more vulnerable to its negative side-effects. Again, stop and think before opening your mouth and digging yourself into a hole you can't climb out of.

BTW, you don't even understand what promiscuity is. You can't be promiscous if others aren't willing. Men are generally more willing to engage in casual sex, which would make promiscuity inherently easier for gays.

That's what happens when you're too stupid to understand the data and use the "all gays are promiscuous" false stereotype as a gay-bashing tool.

I never said I agree with that statement, imbecile. I simply pointed out the dangers resulting from homosexuality remain higher even if that statement were true.

[Darth Executor]

Back on topic, Bill Nye the guy with an engineering degree who's actually an actor pretending to do science engaged in some self-censorship:

http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/02/...nder-ideology/

[Darth Executor]

Such an angry man. Why don't you ask Jesus to make you better?

I'm quoting the authorities in a position to know, namely the APA and virtually every related professional association in the world.

They are in a position to know and routinely misrepresent their own findings, which makes them ideologically driven liars, not authorities to be trusted blindly.

The only argument you can give is that homosexuality is immoral

Wrong, the argument I gave was that homosexuality is a mental disorder that leads to both self-harm and harm to society. In past conversations I further documented the way organizations like the APA use double standards to shield homosexuality from being properly labeled a mental disorder compared to less politically charged disorders like Pica.

The reason why you keep redirecting the argument to religion is because you're too stupid and ignorant to actually debate the topic. Someone of your lilliputian intellect finds it much easier to just drool about religion.

[Tassman]

It has already been addressed, idiot. The reason why you have to keep appealing to your church is because you know what happens when you try to actually address specific issues (like gay promiscuity).

OR