Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From what I've seen, gays have it easy meeting people for sex, much easier than straight guys have it meeting women. I suppose that's why 1-in-5 gay/bi men (20%!) in America's 21 largest cities supposedly have HIV. I know gay people. I know how they are. I've never once thought they had a difficult time meeting others. In a way, I'm envious of how easy they have it, but ultimately don't think it's a good thing, and not just with disease being rampant.
Easier meeting other guys for sex? Perhaps, if you're referring to Craigs List, or apps like grindr. But, this would only be because women are not wired for one night stands, they keep straight guys in line, thus straight guys seem to think they have the monopoly on morality and being more monogamous. Because women are not as inclined for one night stands or quick sex, prostitution is more of a heterosexual institution straight men have utilized. But, women are everywhere! You can meet them anywhere. In fact, they out number men. And men are usually assumed to be straight until proven otherwise, and far more often than not, any guy you meet is straight.
It's very difficult, particularly for older gay men to meet other men of quality who want to settle down. There are still too many gay guys that don't feel comfortable being out enough to commit. Commitment usually equals visibility. Also, it is completely impossible to determine what percent of the gay male population is HIV+ because it is impossible to know the exact amount of gays as a whole. Today, there is virtually no education, or public awareness concerning HIV+. What is interesting is how we are bombarded with awareness about breast cancer, when it's not even a contagious disease. The entire templet used by feminists and health care providers pushing women to get mammograms, and wear pink ribbons was actually ripped off the gay AIDS activists of the 80's. But, not sure why you chose to put a dig into gay males with the HIV thing. It kind of proves the point that gay men have it considerably harder than straight men, particularly finding a partner with the same HIV status. Even with all the homophobia gays have to deal with pushed aside, I wouldn't wish being gay on anyone.
Huh, care to elaborate? Agnostic isn't the right word BTW. As far as science goes, its the people pushing their bias view or opinion of science that's the problem. Simon LeVay PhD a highly accomplished neuroscientist did extensive studies on the differences between heterosexual and homosexual brains in 1991 confirming the differences between the two. It was immediately cast off as unreliable for about any and every frivolous reason imaginable. The media knew as well as the GOP, that if any conclusive evidence was found that determines sexual orientation as innate, that it would no longer be acceptable to have mass discrimination based on sexual orientation. It's really amazing people can be in that much denial today, and assume sexual orientation is a choice, but that is precisely how the phobes have to rationalize and justify their bigotry. Gay and straight men are usually quite distinguishable, regardless of how hard the gay boys try to assimilate. Same with most of the women.
The media knew as well as the GOP, that if any conclusive evidence was found that determines sexual orientation as innate, that it would no longer be acceptable to have mass discrimination based on sexual orientation.
I know that one's sexuality is not a choice, though I want to point out that discriminating against someone based on his or her sexuality should be unacceptable regardless of whether or not it is a choice (for instance, in a scenario where future technology will eventually allow people to voluntarily change their sexuality).
Huh, care to elaborate? Agnostic isn't the right word BTW. As far as science goes, its the people pushing their bias view or opinion of science that's the problem. Simon LeVay PhD a highly accomplished neuroscientist did extensive studies on the differences between heterosexual and homosexual brains in 1991 confirming the differences between the two. It was immediately cast off as unreliable for about any and every frivolous reason imaginable. The media knew as well as the GOP, that if any conclusive evidence was found that determines sexual orientation as innate, that it would no longer be acceptable to have mass discrimination based on sexual orientation. It's really amazing people can be in that much denial today, and assume sexual orientation is a choice, but that is precisely how the phobes have to rationalize and justify their bigotry. Gay and straight men are usually quite distinguishable, regardless of how hard the gay boys try to assimilate. Same with most of the women.
I can elaborate. If a group of people say X, science is agnostic about X being true based upon what this group of people say. Yes, they can scienfically research it, but that's not the statement to which I was responding.
BTW, sexual orientation is a spectrum.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
