Same sex vs Hetero relationship study

Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

GreedyTop -> Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/22/2008 10:53:24 PM)
Forgive me if this has already been posted..lol Study shows same sex couples are as committed as hetero couples

Muttling -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 12:03:40 AM)
quote: debunking the myth that same-sex relationships are not built on the same level of commitment as heterosexual ones. First I've heard of this myth. It's not a surprising result to me in the least.

GreedyTop -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 12:11:48 AM)
yeah, me either... I wonder how much money was spent to discover what most of us already knew?? LOL

samboct -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:05:54 AM)
If I may play devil's advocate for a sec- The origin of the myth has to do with a reasonable hypothesis (and illustrates a flaw in the study or the conclusions the article draws.) which is to whit-level of commitment in a relationship is tied to the number of partners one has prior to the relationship. I suspect that the evidence is highly anecdotal- that promiscuous people are less likely to succeed in a long term relationship than non-promiscuous folks. I have no idea if this is correct, but I'd guess that there are a lot of people that don't question this assumption. When AIDs was taking off in the '80s, the disease quickly migrated due to the promiscuous nature of some homosexual men, who reported having hundreds of partners in a year, thus spreading the virus rapidly. As a percentage of the population, it was pretty clear (again an assumption) that # of promiscuous individuals/overall population was higher amongst homosexual men than heterosexual. These assumptions would suggest that gay men are less likely to form long term relationships than heterosexual men. This may be true- but what the study does point out is that once the population of highly promiscuous individuals have been excluded, homosexual and heterosexual relationships have largely the same chances- a non-trivial finding, especially because there's still a resevoir of distrust over the idea of a gay couple rearing children. This study should also prove to be useful ammunition in the school board wars, since I think the idea that teachers have to be heterosexual is wildly discriminatory and continues to conflate pedophile with homosexuality- another unfounded link. Sam

Owner59 -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:23:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct If I may play devil's advocate for a sec- The origin of the myth has to do with a reasonable hypothesis (and illustrates a flaw in the study or the conclusions the article draws.) which is to whit-level of commitment in a relationship is tied to the number of partners one has prior to the relationship. I suspect that the evidence is highly anecdotal- that promiscuous people are less likely to succeed in a long term relationship than non-promiscuous folks. I have no idea if this is correct, but I'd guess that there are a lot of people that don't question this assumption. When AIDs was taking off in the '80s, the disease quickly migrated due to the promiscuous nature of some homosexual men, who reported having hundreds of partners in a year, thus spreading the virus rapidly. As a percentage of the population, it was pretty clear (again an assumption) that # of promiscuous individuals/overall population was higher amongst homosexual men than heterosexual. These assumptions would suggest that gay men are less likely to form long term relationships than heterosexual men. This may be true- but what the study does point out is that once the population of highly promiscuous individuals have been excluded, homosexual and heterosexual relationships have largely the same chances- a non-trivial finding, especially because there's still a resevoir of distrust over the idea of a gay couple rearing children. This study should also prove to be useful ammunition in the school board wars, since I think the idea that teachers have to be heterosexual is wildly discriminatory and continues to conflate pedophile with homosexuality- another unfounded link. Sam You don`t think that there were straight guys,having sex with hundreds of women,at that time?Remember Wilt,and his claim of thousands? The gay community and the lack of fluid exchange w/ straights,literally saved the heterosexual community from the plague the killed and hurt so many gays.Just look at Africa. I always knew this was true.I didn`t have a study or science degree,but my gut told me that most anti-gay stuff was BS. Like anti-anybody crap, usually is. I know a few couples,(gay) that have been together for 2-3 decades. My marriage lasted one. With half the marriages failing,straights have a lot of nerve pointing fingers. I remember comedians joking, that gays aren`t going to like marriage all that much.One said,"you can stop having sex,.... all on your own.You don`t need marriage, to do that for you."

pahunkboy -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:28:37 AM)
Most gay men go thru a promiscuous phaze- some never snap out of it. Our society is so fixated on bed- whats in the bedroom- for me- is private and no business of my neigbors cowrkers or passersby. When a gay couple commits- they must lose their swinger friends- or anything that is a threat to the relationship. Some folks demand to know then dont like the answer. dont ask dont tell works for me in most situations. tho- often ill disclose to a female so her boyfriend doesnt think im trying to lay the lady. most seem ok with this. im not one to put up rainbow flags or decals, yet if someone throws themself in my face i certainly will done tell them. only one job did i dosclose this- any other job i let people come to their own conclussion. when i lived w Bob for 7 years- we had very separate lifes. tho- no one ever threw a brick thru our window... as some are afraid of. it got to be so embassassing for me- as i had no idea who had been in my bed- the next door neigbor counted 7 insided the space of a friday night when i was out of town. so when grocery shopping-ild wonder each guy- if he had been in my bedroom. no regrets of the past--

Owner59 -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:33:37 AM)
LOL, most *MEN ,*go through a promiscuous phaze. And some never snap out of it.[image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m11.gif[/image] As to pahunks comments,I don`t know all that much about gay sex,it`s all greek to me. Seriously... My gay friends tell me that most gay sex is oral.Which is as safe as it comes.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:38:45 AM)
quote: You don`t think that there were straight guys,having sex with hundreds of women,at that time?Remember Wilt,and his claim of thousands? Anyone who believes that on average young male heterosexuals have as many sex partners as do young male homosexuals is bending over to accommodate the facts. Figures relating the long term stability of mature, in years, homosexual and heterosexual couples, I dont know. There must be quite a lot of homosexual couples because in the UK we had a change to the inheritance Laws specifically designed to favour homosexuals. So much for the supposed neutrality of legal systems.

Owner59 -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:44:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave quote: You don`t think that there were straight guys,having sex with hundreds of women,at that time?Remember Wilt,and his claim of thousands? Anyone who believes that on average young male heterosexuals have as many sex partners as do young male homosexuals is bending over to accommodate the facts. Figures relating the long term stability of mature, in years, homosexual and heterosexual couples, I dont know. There must be quite a lot of homosexual couples because in the UK we had a change to the inheritance Laws specifically designed to favour homosexuals. So much for the supposed neutrality of legal systems. I`m just saying that men are men. I guess you`re to old to remember the 70s-80s.There was a lot of fucking going on.Lots... <just kidding w/ the age remark>

beargonewild -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 8:45:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct If I may play devil's advocate for a sec- The origin of the myth has to do with a reasonable hypothesis (and illustrates a flaw in the study or the conclusions the article draws.) which is to whit-level of commitment in a relationship is tied to the number of partners one has prior to the relationship. I suspect that the evidence is highly anecdotal- that promiscuous people are less likely to succeed in a long term relationship than non-promiscuous folks. I have no idea if this is correct, but I'd guess that there are a lot of people that don't question this assumption. When AIDs was taking off in the '80s, the disease quickly migrated due to the promiscuous nature of some homosexual men, who reported having hundreds of partners in a year, thus spreading the virus rapidly. As a percentage of the population, it was pretty clear (again an assumption) that # of promiscuous individuals/overall population was higher amongst homosexual men than heterosexual. These assumptions would suggest that gay men are less likely to form long term relationships than heterosexual men. This may be true- but what the study does point out is that once the population of highly promiscuous individuals have been excluded, homosexual and heterosexual relationships have largely the same chances- a non-trivial finding, especially because there's still a resevoir of distrust over the idea of a gay couple rearing children. This study should also prove to be useful ammunition in the school board wars, since I think the idea that teachers have to be heterosexual is wildly discriminatory and continues to conflate pedophile with homosexuality- another unfounded link. Sam Don't forget that in the 80's, nobody knew that much about the HIV virus. At that time, the entire medical community had no idea on where the virus originated, how the virus spread, had no idea on the exact nature of this deadly virus. Basically they knew sweet fuck all other then it was viralant(sp) and they had no way to arrest the spread of this disease or how to effectively help the victims.

pahunkboy -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:04:58 AM)
Given the opportunity guys will have sex. of any "orientation" - woman stop alot of it. lets face it- if one had the chance of alot of sex -w nice looking meat- most of us would cave in. gay men have had more partners over a lifetime. then what is sex? if it sex if you stand up? if you dont penitrate anyone? if yyou dont touch? what about cyber? phone? spontanious explosions?

GreedyTop -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:07:51 AM)
hell, a lot of women go through promiscuous stages too... just they are less inclined to to talk about it (that whole virginal thing that society as a whole is hung up on..LOL). Of all the committed couples I know, it's the GAY couples that have been together for ages. Most of the het couples are on their second or third LTR (in one case, he's on his 5th, she's on her 7th). Yes, in my circle there are gay couples that have gone through breakups...but as a rule, those breakups have generally come after 20 yrs or more of commitment. just my .02 :)

faerytattoodgirl -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:08:49 AM)
what a crock. same sex are the same people as hetero...so duh why wouldnt they last just as long??? we are no different than you are...we're just gay.

pahunkboy -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:11:11 AM)
i get tested every year for STDs - i was surprised to learn that the valley here has a handfull of ickey STDs.... climidia for one...that particalr Dr gave me a lecture. i dont blame him- at the time i thought with the wrong head.

Owner59 -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:18:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beargonewild quote: ORIGINAL: samboct If I may play devil's advocate for a sec- The origin of the myth has to do with a reasonable hypothesis (and illustrates a flaw in the study or the conclusions the article draws.) which is to whit-level of commitment in a relationship is tied to the number of partners one has prior to the relationship. I suspect that the evidence is highly anecdotal- that promiscuous people are less likely to succeed in a long term relationship than non-promiscuous folks. I have no idea if this is correct, but I'd guess that there are a lot of people that don't question this assumption. When AIDs was taking off in the '80s, the disease quickly migrated due to the promiscuous nature of some homosexual men, who reported having hundreds of partners in a year, thus spreading the virus rapidly. As a percentage of the population, it was pretty clear (again an assumption) that # of promiscuous individuals/overall population was higher amongst homosexual men than heterosexual. These assumptions would suggest that gay men are less likely to form long term relationships than heterosexual men. This may be true- but what the study does point out is that once the population of highly promiscuous individuals have been excluded, homosexual and heterosexual relationships have largely the same chances- a non-trivial finding, especially because there's still a resevoir of distrust over the idea of a gay couple rearing children. This study should also prove to be useful ammunition in the school board wars, since I think the idea that teachers have to be heterosexual is wildly discriminatory and continues to conflate pedophile with homosexuality- another unfounded link. Sam Don't forget that in the 80's, nobody knew that much about the HIV virus. At that time, the entire medical community had no idea on where the virus originated, how the virus spread, had no idea on the exact nature of this deadly virus. Basically they knew sweet fuck all other then it was viralant(sp) and they had no way to arrest the spread of this disease or how to effectively help the victims. How Reagan and the leadership ,purposefully ignored the crisis,is something I will never forgive them for.It was just fags,after all..... I remember Jessie Helms,and his slurpy,swishy garbled voice say,"If the gays doen`t wown`ta get AIDS,then just shh-top"<slurp,smack>.... Though he claimed to regret saying those horrible things(and others),he was as complete an ass hole, as they come.And like current policy makers,he had a deadly affect on society. Reagan didn`t mention the word AIDS,for years,but towards the end,was asleep most of the time, anyway. I remember right-wing talk show hosts,saying that we shouldn`t pay for their(aids victims) health-care,because they were dirty fagots who got AIDS having dirty,sinful,gay ,fag-sex.A lot of vitriol and bigotry,added to myths and ignorance,was the order of the day. "Why should normal people,pay for abnormal people`s behavior?,was one rant."They did it to themselves,tough luck",was another. This was god`s vengeance and judgment of gays,was yet another. Another example of why medicine,religion and politics don`t mix.You get these holier than tho, religious nuts in power,power over people,resources and the CDC,and their influence becomes at best,un-healthy,and at worst,deadly.

samboct -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:21:59 AM)
Bear Yup- I do remember the first time I heard the description of AIDs over the airwaves and thought "who are they kidding?" But the public health community screwed up badly with that disease- they should have treated the same as any other STD and they didn't. This would entail registration lists of who'd been exposed, following up partners, and quarantines if necessary. Instead, the gay community was very politically savvy (and probably assisted by politicians not wanting to be outed) which kept identification of individuals secret from the public health community- thus allowing the disease to gain much more of a foothold than it should have. The idea espoused by Jerry Falwell that AIDS was divine retribution caught on (more idiocy) and was very akin to the Supreme Court's decision back in the 1920s that public health moneys were not to be spent on syphilis since "honest folks" didn't have to worry about STDs. Again showing that perhaps the most deficient part of our educational system is history.... Owner- a couple of points. IIRC, there are different strains in Africa which are more readily transmitted through heterosexual sex than the US strains which prefer genital/anal routes of transmission. While oral sex has reduced rates of transmission, this is a virus that mutates rapidly and so counting on something like "oral sex is safe" is probably not a brilliant idea. Also- agree with Seeks- my anecdotal evidence is that gay men can have more partners than straight guys based on talking to my friends (both straight and gay) but this is a very small data pool and is certainly biased. However, I do recall an article from Science back in the 80s- (90s?) which showed that heterosexual women- if they decide to be promiscuous- have more partners than promiscuous heterosexual men- again with some personal data to back this up. Heck, I think Kinsey's work backs this up as well- there are fewer promiscuous women than promiscuous men- which means that the women have to have more partners. Look at the response rates on this board- how many men complain that they get deluged with emails versus how many women? Hence, I think a lot of male promiscuity is largely braggadocio... Sam

pahunkboy -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:22:28 AM)
Then the pendulum swang- and aids fundiing was disproportionatly skewed. at teh expense of cancers- which more are likely to get. the argument w the French as to whom isolated the virus. act-up the group- did in your face protests- who could blame them? then fast track FDA drug approval happened. at 1st it was a good thing- but now has come to approve marginal and placebo pill like celbrex.

Owner59 -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:44:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Bear Yup- I do remember the first time I heard the description of AIDs over the airwaves and thought "who are they kidding?" But the public health community screwed up badly with that disease- they should have treated the same as any other STD and they didn't. This would entail registration lists of who'd been exposed, following up partners, and quarantines if necessary. Instead, the gay community was very politically savvy (and probably assisted by politicians not wanting to be outed) which kept identification of individuals secret from the public health community- thus allowing the disease to gain much more of a foothold than it should have. The idea espoused by Jerry Falwell that AIDS was divine retribution caught on (more idiocy) and was very akin to the Supreme Court's decision back in the 1920s that public health moneys were not to be spent on syphilis since "honest folks" didn't have to worry about STDs. Again showing that perhaps the most deficient part of our educational system is history.... Owner- a couple of points. IIRC, there are different strains in Africa which are more readily transmitted through heterosexual sex than the US strains which prefer genital/anal routes of transmission. While oral sex has reduced rates of transmission, this is a virus that mutates rapidly and so counting on something like "oral sex is safe" is probably not a brilliant idea. Also- agree with Seeks- my anecdotal evidence is that gay men can have more partners than straight guys based on talking to my friends (both straight and gay) but this is a very small data pool and is certainly biased. However, I do recall an article from Science back in the 80s- (90s?) which showed that heterosexual women- if they decide to be promiscuous- have more partners than promiscuous heterosexual men- again with some personal data to back this up. Heck, I think Kinsey's work backs this up as well- there are fewer promiscuous women than promiscuous men- which means that the women have to have more partners. Look at the response rates on this board- how many men complain that they get deluged with emails versus how many women? Hence, I think a lot of male promiscuity is largely braggadocio... Sam I should have been clearer.In the realm of un-protected sex,oral is safer.Emphasis's on the 'er'. Not to date myself,but I remember when all sex was safe,and the clap was all you got.Herpes was new,and a drag,but not deadly. After divorcing in the mid '90s',I had to deal with all the new rules and common sense things. Though hardly promiscuous,I get tested at Morristown Hospital`s free clinic,for HIV,when I take a new partner. The 1st time I went,I got a hard time from the Dr. there.He was like,"ppuffst!,WTF are you doing here",You don`t shoot up and aren`t gay!?!?",was his attitude.I didn`t feel welcome or comfortable. The second time I got tested(ten years later),the Dr. on call, was very upset to hear about my treatment on the 1st visit.I expected more of the same,but didn`t.The new Dr. was top notch. He also said it`s a good idea,for new couples who are planing to have un-protected sex,to get tested.The new one(AIDS test) is cheap,quick,and doesn`t require blood.

LadyEllen -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 9:57:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave There must be quite a lot of homosexual couples because in the UK we had a change to the inheritance Laws specifically designed to favour homosexuals. So much for the supposed neutrality of legal systems. How exactly did it favour them? My impression was that it was a long overdue equalisation of rights for committed couples who because of our antiquated state religion did not enjoy the same rights as those favoured by the Church because they deviated from the heterosexual model. E

seeksfemslave -> RE: Same sex vs Hetero relationship study (1/23/2008 4:53:46 PM)
The raison d'etre for the change to the law was as you indicate an attempt to equalise rights But homosexual and heterosexual formal relationships are not equivelant. This fact, as you point out, has long been recognised by both "antiquated" organisations and society in general in context over many hundreds if not thousands of years. Therefore the "rights" arguement is another PC red herring. It is true that to criminalise homosexuality is mistaken and has caused untold suffering but it does not follow that such relationships should be considered "normal" since plainly they are not when viewed from the underlying reason for sexual activity, which is not pleasure but procreation. Therefore it seems to me that those in legislative power chose to favour those with whom, if "common knowledge" is to be believed, they have a great deal of sympathy. As an example it was noted that two sisters who had live chastely together were now at a disadvantage when compared with lesbian or male homosexual couples who had entered into a social contract. That is what I meant.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125