Why the difference?

[David Gould]

Oh, please, we live in a society where third date = sex. It's not that hard for a man to get their evolutionary grove on.

It is not that easy, actually. Some men find it easy to get dates. Many do not. So, while the men who find it easy to get dates are getting lots of sex, those who do not find it easy are not.

Even if it's easier for gay men to find willing partners, it does not explain the enormous gap between 250 and 9.

Um, yes, it does. If it is 30 times easier for gay men to find willing partners, that explains the gap.

Or why men get married at all if they just have to spread their seed across the land.

The reason marriage is so popular is that it is a guarantee of getting sex and hence children.

The whole point is that women are the ones who decide whether the man gets sex. A woman seeks commitment. Marriage is a significant commitment. Once a man makes that commitment, they are guaranteed sex (for at least a few years, at any rate! ).

Society is changing, and one of the main reasons is the easy access to contraception. Women no longer have to risk a massive investment every time they have sex. However, women still face internal biological pressure to have children. And they therefore still tend to make men jump through some hoops before they have sex with them.

 

[David Gould]

(I should point out here that I am taking the study at face value.)

 

[steen]

Well yeah. That's my point.

People say that homosexual behavior is normal, but they're all doing this stuff, so how can it be normal?

Well, first you need to prove that your conclusion from the study is valid and supports your claim. There is good evidence in this tread that your claim is outright nonsense, so you need to do a lot more work on that issue.

 

[steen]

You mean you don't want to believe it.

How so?

So 'society' causes 60% to commit sodomy with 250+ guys?

Sodomy? Anal sex? I must have missed where the study claimed this. Perhaps you should be a bit more careful about your claims here, huh?

If it does it suggests that same-sex attraction is a symptom of some greater mental instability, or it could be a disorder itself.

Given that the research into mental health is categorically denying this, your claim now turns to hyperbole and outright nonsense. It could actually be construed as outright hate mongering, so I am asking you to please refrain from such claims, thanks.

 

[DivineRAiN]

CSmrw: Moreover, society frowns on prostitution, socially, ususally outlawing it completely, so that you not only run the risk of being found out and ridiculed or persecuted by your social group, you also run the ristk of actual penalties and a record.

I know at one time they used to set up stings up on Fenkell (west-side of Detroit) on the weekends and the cars would be brought to a parkinglot around the block from me... They would have several flatbeds come and take the vehicles.
And for a regular female living near Fenkell.. we can be walking home with stuff bought at the store,.. pop, milk, bread, so on.. and some guy pulls over and asks if you wanna have some fun. You know that most, if not all, aren't from Detroit. They're white men from Livonia, Redford n so on. And you take note of the wedding band on their finger while you tell 'em where to go.
I believe the statistic for heterosexual men is too low even for the 70's... n it wouldn't fit if we were to try to apply it to men today.

 

[steen]

But it isn't too hard to find a one-night stand should you look for one. Women have casual sex, too, and more so now than ever.

The idea that straight men would have upwards of 250 partners if they only could is the invalid arguement, imo.

Well, we could conduct a study of heterosexual men in the 80s and recruit subjects from professional basketball teams. What was it Wilt Chamberlain claimed? 10,000 sex-partners?

It think we should outlaw heterosexuals, we are such animals.

 

[DivineRAiN]

David: It is not that easy, actually. Some men find it easy to get dates. Many do not. So, while the men who find it easy to get dates are getting lots of sex, those who do not find it easy are not.

They have to learn how to be jerks.. women for the most part will overlook a nice guy (stick him in the friends category), and go for the guy who treats her like crap (some/most of the time).

 

[DivineRAiN]

David: However, women still face internal biological pressure to have children. And they therefore still tend to make men jump through some hoops before they have sex with them.

I remember reading a thread kinda similar to this on a russ parr morning show mb (uptoparr) not that long ago. The guys had a similar point of view along with some of the women.. that it's the nice guy that'll have to wait n jump thru hoops. The woman will want to do things differently since she figures that what she had been doing wasn't working out.. like having sex on the first date. She doesn't want to make the same mistakes, and she doesn't want the relationship to be based on sex. She'll want to establish some sort of friendship first. If n when the relationship fails, and she goes back to dealing with a guy who isn't a nice guy.. she doesn't make him wait or jump thru hoops.

And considering the high number of single Mothers out there.. women aren't taking the time to get to really know the guys they're dealing with before giving it up.. even the guy's last name. She ends up raising her child alone, the guy doesn't want anything to do with the child n he doesn't want to pay child support. This was also brought up on the russparr message board

 

[CSmrw]

CSmrw: Moreover, society frowns on prostitution, socially, ususally outlawing it completely, so that you not only run the risk of being found out and ridiculed or persecuted by your social group, you also run the ristk of actual penalties and a record.

I know at one time they used to set up stings up on Fenkell (west-side of Detroit) on the weekends and the cars would be brought to a parkinglot around the block from me... They would have several flatbeds come and take the vehicles.
And for a regular female living near Fenkell.. we can be walking home with stuff bought at the store,.. pop, milk, bread, so on.. and some guy pulls over and asks if you wanna have some fun. You know that most, if not all, aren't from Detroit. They're white men from Livonia, Redford n so on. And you take note of the wedding band on their finger while you tell 'em where to go.
I believe the statistic for heterosexual men is too low even for the 70's... n it wouldn't fit if we were to try to apply it to men today.

I can only speak for myself. I don't believe that sexuality in America, which is the country I live in and know the most about, is sane. Perhaps there is no sane sexuality anywhere, but in my country it's cruel and backwards and illogical and pathetic. But it makes people a boatload of money this way, and it forces maleability and self loathing on people, which makes selling them nonsense even easier. It's a bait and switch game from the moment you are old enough to notice there is a difference between boys and girls. But most folks seem to be much more content when they are miserable. Strange.

 

[wblastyn]

You mean you don't want to believe it.

How so?

So 'society' causes 60% to commit sodomy with 250+ guys?
If it does it suggests that same-sex attraction is a symptom of some greater mental instability, or it could be a disorder itself.

Well I'd say someone here has a disorder and it aint the gays... Seriously, someone must be living in bizarro fantasy land if you think all gay people are super-promiscuous.

Those hypotheses aside, why is it that the SSA affirmative side always blames a person's problems on someone else? It's seems very reactive, rather than proactive. It is true that things influence us a bit. But in this case don't you think it's better to stop and say "why do people with same-sex attractions choose such behavior" rather blaming the boogey-man of 'society'?

No one here who supports gay people would ask why they "chose such behaviour" because anyone here who knows anything about gay people, or even their own sexuality, knows you do not choose who you are attracted to.

 

[sister_maynard]

I think by "such behavior" he meant promiscuity, but I agree with your point- you can't control to whom you are attracted.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Being attracted to something != pursuing it.

I was once attracted to my neighbors car. I wanted a car like that. I did not pursue it.

Once I was attracted to my friend's girlfriend. I did not pursue her. I ignored the feelings, thought about other things, and eventually they went away.

 

[sister_maynard]

Your point being....? I was trying to clear something up for the poster above me- the attraction is uncontrollable, but the promiscuity is a choice.

 

[HisEagle]

Being attracted to something != pursuing it.

I was once attracted to my neighbors car. I wanted a car like that. I did not pursue it.

Once I was attracted to my friend's girlfriend. I did not pursue her. I ignored the feelings, thought about other things, and eventually they went away.

Uh huh. But did you stop being a heterosexual?

 

[wblastyn]

Being attracted to something != pursuing it.

I was once attracted to my neighbors car. I wanted a car like that. I did not pursue it.

You were not sexually attracted to a car, you coveted it, there's a difference. Unless I'm wrong and you actually were sexually attracted to an inanimate object...

Once I was attracted to my friend's girlfriend. I did not pursue her. I ignored the feelings, thought about other things, and eventually they went away.

Yes, but did you stop being attracted to females in general? I suspect not.

 

[DivineRAiN]

does he avoid attraction to (some) females?

KarateCowboy.. for a heterosexual, he can decide not to pursue a friend's girlfriend, and at some point the feelings will go away. He'll eventually find someone else. His attraction will be triggered by a woman.
For a homosexual, the attraction will always be triggered by ppl of the same gender. So while the heterosexual is having fun with the new partner he found.. the homosexual can't do the same?