http://www.josephnicolosi.com/an-op en-secret-the-truth-abou

>A much-cited study by Bell and Weinberg (1978), published by the Kinsey Institute, and often called the most ambitious study of homosexuality ever attempted, gathered its data before the AIDS crisis had begun. This study showed that 28 percent of homosexual males had had sexual encounters with one thousand or more partners.
Stopped right here. I was suspecting this to be at least partially bullshit up until that point, but this is where it really got stupid.

This study has NEVER been replicated, anon. Nobody since has ever found such a significant number of gay men to have had anywhere near to "over a thousand partners" - not from a random sample, anyway. The sample in the Bell and Weinberg study was nowhere near random, with the gay men getting recruited for the study primarily from places like gay bathhouses, sex clubs and the like. The chances of that sample being highly skewed to the most promiscuous gays is very high.

I don't think there's anything excusable about having hundreds or thousands of sex partners. I believe it's true that there are more gays that meet this description than straights (although some straight people are this promiscuous too).

But it is NOT representative of all gays. Try again.

>>8638767
>click on link
>first thing I fucking see
>"parent's guide to preventing homosexuality"

Wow, I bet that garbage is a really interesting read, but I just don't have time to read garbage.

>I don't think there's anything excusable about having hundreds or thousands of sex partners.

Why does it require an "excuse"?

>>8638825
The date makes it suspect but in 2017 with the prevalence of Grindr, I don't doubt it.

>>8638825
So how many monogamous gay men who are able to stay in a single relationship for 10+ years without being a cheating slut do you know?

>>8638842
i'm grossed out by gays, how can you possibly trust a person like that?

>>8638844
Because your actions have consequences for the rest of society, you self-absorbed little disease vector of a faggot.

>>8638848
Okay. Then go get a representative sample of gay men and replicate the results. It's a 40-year-old study which got results that no one else ever has. If you think it's legit, go get the data.

>>8638865
Monogamy is for heteros raising children.
One of the percs of being gay/single is frequent sex.
Straight men are just as horny as gay men.

>>8638872
'cheating' and 'promiscuity' are arbitrary heteronormative social constructs, you know

>>8638865
None of the gay couples I know have cheated on each other, but that's only a few, so not a huge sample. I don't befriend whores, I guess.

What does this have to do with my post, though? I wasn't addressing long-term monogamy (especially since, frankly, a few partners outside of a marriage aren't going to be that shocking even to straight people, that kind of thing isn't exclusive to gays), I was addressing the claims to insanely high numbers of partners.

You know perfectly well that part is the most scandalous, not "lots of people in long-term relationships cheat at some point."

>>8638880
>heteronormative
>social constructs
kys

>>8638873
>Can't keep it in their pants so they have to justify/rationalize it as being for straight people only.
Which is exactly what the article was talking about in the first place. Thanks for proving it right.

I'd honestly be very interested if just one of you would/could stop your hyperbole and histrionics and rationally explain --why I should care-- about the fact that I'm not living to your personal moral code.

All of you just state the obvious fact that we don't believe the same things, but you never back anything up with anything more than an assumption that your moral superiority is self-evident. It's like an argument from a tumblrkin mad that people aren't recognizing zim for being a wolf. I can only pretend to care if I have nothing better to do than fuck with you. Can't you try to make me care just a little bit?

>>8638872
>Because your actions have consequences for the rest of society, you self-absorbed little disease vector of a faggot.

You mean the consequence of safe sex education?

>>8638913
>Why should I care about having a semblance of personal restraint in my life and not spreading disease to the rest of the population?

>>8638956
>Why should I try and make a rational argument when I can just construct a strawman to attack with more histrionic hyperbole and pretend I am right without trying?

You argue exactly like a tumblr feminist.

>>8638767
The real question is how you normal heterosexuals have so little self control and are so goddamn selfish, abusive, and generally fucking sick, yet genuinely believe gay people are any worse than you.

I'll say it, gay people who are in gay communities are fucking sluts and are human garbage.
But that's not different than your average normie heterosexual who participates in normie community. They go to bars just in the same, get smashed, then rape each other and fuck strangers.

It's not a gay thing. It's a normal person thing.
For some reason normal people's sexual culture is fucking sick and depraved.
Thank fuck I'm neither gay or heterosexual. That's horrid. Toxic relationships, empty loveless relationships, the whole lot, unless you're a rare snowflake that doesn't participate or can't, in which case you're usually autistic and miserable or 2good4relationships.
You're no better you shit-citing faghater.

>>8638997
>They go to bars just in the same, get smashed, then rape each other and fuck strangers.
The difference is that at most straight people at some point learn that kind of lifestyle can't last forever, people who live like that well into their 40s and 50s are rightfully looked down upon. Meanwhile gays aren't confronted with ever having to mature and grow up, they never have to live for anyone but themselves.

It's not a gay thing, it's a male thing. Straight men are only less promiscuous because women gatekeep their sexual desires. Gay men don't have any gatekeepers and are thus more promiscuous.
Look at the sexual behavior and monogamy rates for lesbians and then get back to me. They have the lowest rates of cheating, lowest # of partners, highest rates of monogamy and lowest rates of cheating. It's because they're women.

>>8639084
You sound really bitter. lol

Fact is you're just talking out of your ass because old slutty fags ARE looked down upon.. "rightfully" or otherwise.

>>8639098
Yep. Pretty much all of this. Except there are male "gatekeepers" of a sort. Attractive gay men don't want to fuck ugly retards any more than attractive women do, and ugly retards can't ever seem to come to terms with the fact that they have to settle for someone like themselves.
Which explains this thread. Bunch of ugly autistic virgins angry that people are having sex.

>>8639098
My bad, the last one was supposed to be lowest rates of sexually transmitted infections.

>>8639147
Of course, there's always going to be bitter betas complaining about the "friendzone" and how people who are way out of their league should be fucking them.

File: sourgrapesaesop.gif (159KB, 700x824px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 700x824px

>>8639163
No anon, they don't want to fuck those dirty diseased sluts. They have morals. Jesus loves them for their purity.

>>8639224
Both, personally.
I see nothing wrong with fooling around when you are young. But I have never met an older guy who still does it who wasn't trying way too hard to pretend he wasn't an adult.

>>8639147
>old slutty fags ARE looked down upon
Yeah, but only because they're seen as unfuckable, not because they're manchildren.

>>8639098
This is why men need women as much as women need men. They both provide a different type of stability that fufill the other's needs that the same sex can't provide.