Is being gay a guarantee that you'll always get some kind of action?

[astro]

Just wondering. Heterosexual males often (not always) have to do a fair amount of wining, dining, listening and assorted other machinations to convince a female they are worthy to mate with.

I was wondering though, given men's (gay and non-gay) somewhat more direct attitude towards sex as a physical connection (vs emotional connection) goal, can gay guys be assured of getting some action anytime they want to go after it socially or do prospective partners make you jump through the same hoops as women being courted?

[Eidolon909]

Yes. They're called Bath Houses.

[Walloon]

Heterosexuality = male libido / female libido

Homosexuality (male) = male libido squared

[EchoKitty]

I don't know about that...there are at least a couple of gay guys on the boards who have never had sex. And there's a whole bunch that aren't slutting around, either. I would also think they would have to date much the same as hets do if they want to find a loving, committed relationship (which most do). Doing dinner, theater, movies...just like everyone else.

[Eve]

I have a friend—who shall go nameless here—who is a 41-year-old gay virgin. He's a dear heart, but not terribly good-looking, and rather shy. Also, he does not want one-night stands, he'd like a "boyfriend."

So, no, all gay men are not sex machines.

[Mockingbird]

There are no guarantees one will get laid, no matter the sexual preference.

And just because it is two men together is not meaning boinkfest either.

What I have found is this: most men talk a good game and claim sexual prowess/endurance. It does not match up with reality.

[Homebrew]

Depends on your standards, same as with straight folk. Anyone can get laid if they have sufficiently low standards.

[handy]

Yes there are some gay guys on the board posting that they gaid laid, however, there were times they posted that they were NOT getting laid.....

Best odds for getting laid I would say, rest with those who are bisexual.

[Legomancer]

Originally posted by handy
Best odds for getting laid I would say, rest with those who are bisexual.

Or those who dig trees. Cause trees are, like, everywhere, and can't run fast.

[dorkusmalorkusmafia]

Nothing guarantees getting action. That said, I think it is pretty easy to get laid whenever I want to assuming that is what I want. It is also pretty easy to get a continuing romance going if that is what I am looking for at the time. I personally like to have repeat sexual encounters unlike one of my friends (who is particularly gross looking...it is hard to explain, just take my word for it) who has sex with at least one new person every 2 or 3 days and doesn't do repeats. The friends I have in the leather community call people like him "collectors."

[Second Guest]

Originally posted by astro
Heterosexual males often (not always) have to do a fair amount of wining, dining, listening and assorted other machinations to convince a female they are worthy to mate with.

So, following that line of thought, should we also be wondering whether lesbians ever get any action?

[Surreal]

What about lesbians?

With no man in the relationship constantly pushing for sex, one would assume that lesbians have sex infrequently. Is this true?

[Surreal]

Ha!

Simulpost.

[gobear]

Many gay men don't to go at it 24/7, and many non-promiscuous gay men prefer the courtship rituals of dating and are monogamous.

But if I read the OP correctly, the question isn't do gay men get more action, but can gay men get more action than straight men. The answer is, clearly, yes. If I chose to do so, I could go out and get laid any time I please. I don't because my bf and I are monogamous.

[Pythagras]

Originally posted by Surreal
What about lesbians?

With no man in the relationship constantly pushing for sex, one would assume that lesbians have sex infrequently. Is this true?

On what do you base the presumption that women have no libido whilst guys will randomly hump the nearest warm blooded mammal with 2 boobs?

[DMark]

A lot of straight guys just assume it is easier for gay guys to have sex when they want - they assume all gay men lust for all other gay men.
WRONG.
He's too short, too fat, too old, too thin, too tall, too loud, too hairy, too too too too.....the list goes on. Granted, this sometimes changes 15 minutes before last call, but for the most part, gay men are at least as picky, if not much more so, when selecting partners.
I am sure hetero guys could go out and get laid every night as well, but just like their gay counterparts, they might not want to be showing photos of their conguests to their buddies.

[Ethilrist]

Originally posted by Pythagras


On what do you base the presumption that women have no libido whilst guys will randomly hump the nearest warm blooded mammal with 2 boobs?
20th century american cinema?

[CrazyCatLady]

Any man who can make a fist is guaranteed of getting some kind of action. Hey, you never said there had to be another person involved.

[Potter]

In my experience, 'gay culture' is sexualised to a degree that mixed/straight culture is not; I don't think I've ever heard a gay man being refered to as 'over-sexed' as such a thing simply does not exist. I would say it does seem to be more acceptable amongst my gay acquaintances to have had multiple one-nighters than it is amongst my straight friends, and so the casual pick-up is much easier to find - there simply seems to be more of us happy for a quick emotionless boff out looking for it. I have gay friends who are nothing particularly outstanding when it comes to physical attractiveness who have had sex partners in the 1000's, whereas straight, attractive male friends of mine seem to think they're experienced if their partners linger around the 20-mark. Furthermore, having had sex partners in the 1000's is neither a matter for pride or shame for them or their friends; it's just accepted as being indicative of having an active libido and isn't really discussed further than the trick's shortcomings/adequacies. The majority of my gay friends will go out specifically to meet someone for sex, sometimes on a nightly basis; my straight friends go out for fun at the weekends and seem to consider it a bonus if they meet a potential sex partner.

If I wanted sex tonight, I know I could find it quickly, easily and with someone I found physically attractive - I have places available to me where I know there will be men waiting for a casual sex partner, and I also know I will not be judged within my peer group for indulging in a purely physical encounter. I've never had to jump through hoops as cruising often consists of little more than a few weighted looks and a nod in the direction of the door. Plus I'd have to disagee with DMark and say that, also in my experience, gay men tend to be one HELL of a lot less 'picky' than the single women I know.

[Ooner]

I have gay friends who are nothing particularly outstanding when it comes to physical attractiveness who have had sex partners in the 1000's, whereas straight, attractive male friends of mine seem to think they're experienced if their partners linger around the 20-mark. Furthermore, having had sex partners in the 1000's is neither a matter for pride or shame for them or their friends; it's just accepted as being indicative of having an active libido and isn't really discussed further than the trick's shortcomings/adequacies.

I have places available to me where I know there will be men waiting for a casual sex partner, and I also know I will not be judged within my peer group for indulging in a purely physical encounter.

Any gay man I know who goes someplace, meets someone, and "engages in a purely physical encounter" on more than maybe one rare occasion of desperation would be promptly called a slut or whore by me and lose a large amount of my respect.

However, it seems that I'm one of the few people that think like this. In most cases, you're right and nobody really cares how much of a slut a gay guy is. It's expected. :(

[betenoir]

Originally posted by Ethilrist

20th century american cinema?


Goodness! Next you'll be telling me you believe the stuff you see on television!

[DMark]

Originally posted by Potter
Plus I'd have to disagee with DMark and say that, also in my experience, gay men tend to be one HELL of a lot less 'picky' than the single women I know.

I cannot begin to tell you of the number or guys who were very attractive who would rather go home alone and j/o rather than go with someone they felt were not up to their standards. Maybe it is an urban thing...but I saw it in Berlin, in NYC and in LA all the time.
I had one friend who was drop dead gorgeous and could walk into a bar and never pay for a drink from all the offers...but he always paid his own. I never once saw him meet a guy at a bar.
Another friend has never had a boyfriend because no one has ever met his impossible standards...and this is a guy who is no prize himself.
I also know far too many men who have totally unrealistic standards...they are into men 20-30 years younger than themselves, or they are out of shape but only want bodybuilders, or they want the huge schlong (which they do not have), or they insist the guy must have money and a house and a fancy car...
However, I do know of ONE guy who was Mr. Drummer who really only liked older men with potguts...go figure.
Yes, there are the sluts who will do and go with anyone, but in my experience, they are the lonely ones who score late at night in the dark.
Picky? Oh yeah...
While alchohol and drugs do create unlikely partners, for the most part, I still maintain that gay men (in larger urban areas) are dooming themselves into a secular life of loneliness...and only when the combination of age and reality hit, do they ever have a chance at meeting someone for a long term relationship.
By the way, I have been with my lover for 22 years - we still go out and we still have a lot of single friends and we still watch the scene in the bars and in other social occasions.
Nothing has changed, other than the clothing fashion and music. A few weeks ago we overheard a 20 something guy tell his friend, "He's got a big dick, but he drives a Focus..."
And so it goes....

[iampunha]

Originally posted by handy
Best odds for getting laid I would say, rest with those who are bisexual.

Oh, Hell no.

Let me repeat for those who missed it the first time.

Hell No (TM). I mean, criminy, we're still on this very board fighting the popular perceptions that:

A) bisexuals can't be monogamous
B) bisexuals don't want to be monogamous
C) (less pervasive, but still brought up often enough) Bisexuals are just transitioning from straight to gay (this is said more often about men than women)
D) Bisexuals don't care if they're getting laid by a Dom man, a Dom woman, a Sub or whatever, as long as they're getting laid. Hell, it's equal opportunity, right?:sigh:

Granted, being bisexual, in *some* circles (very few that I've run into, but they do exist), is seen as cool because one has the natural tendency to be attracted to members of the same sex and opposite sex, but if anything else this means we're more prone to heartache/break. And let's not even get started on the issue of being dumped because someone thinks that being bisexual means you are unable to commit, or who won't date you specifically because you're bi.

Have I had more physical interaction ("bases", if you must) because of my sexuality? Yes. HOWEVER. All but two of those people I've been with were bisexual (including my ex-girlfriend and a guy who, had circumstances not dictated otherwise, could easily have been my first boyfriend).

But please don't assume that being bisexual means you have more options for getting laid. It means that you're not restricted by gender, but by no means does that equate to sex.

[Potter]

Ooner, I was about to reply that the expectation is not that as a gay man you will/should be extremely sexually active, but thinking on it, you're right. I have celibate by choice friends who are pretty much seen as freaks within this city's queer community, the argument being one of why choose not to have sex when it is out there waiting for you? What must be wrong with you that you distance yourself from the rest of the scene, etc. I do object to your use of the term 'slut', though. For whatever reasons you have for judging someone on a basis of their sexual activity does not factor in their own judgement of themselves, or that of their immediate peer group. It's seen as having an itch that they get scratched, nothing more, nothing less. I'll admit that privately on hearing of the latest orgy for example, I've had thoughts along the lines of 'Damn, some people will let just about anyone stick anything anywhere', but I accept that's more to do with my own prejudices and experiences. I would never dream of refering to anyone as a slut just because they choose to enjoy safe, consensual sex on a more regular basis than I do. Anonymous sex has never been a particular turn-on of mine, but I'm a big believer in 'whatever floats your boat' and am happy to take at face value that this scene works for them.

DMark, what I was speaking of has generally been an urban phenomenon in my experience, simply because more rural areas tend to have a distinct lack of specified cruising spots. I am also speaking of men in long-term relationships; I personally know only one monogamous gay couple and many of the most predominant cruisers I know go home nightly to their nice boyfriends, some couples I know will go cruising together. Most of my friends will sleep with someone not up to their 'boyfriend' standards then happily dissect the guy's worse points over a few drinks with their buddies later on ("The sex was ok, but did you see his HAIR?!"); in my experience, the guy commenting on the Focus would be doing that afterwards. Anonymous or one-night sex simply does not seem to be as big a deal as it does with my straight friends; if you feel the need, you go for it, knowing that the other guy is doing precisely the same thing, and think nothing more on it other than it was fun (hopefully) and that the next guy is probably around the corner.

FTR I do not consider myself to be a slut, I only sleep with those I find attractive and am probably fairly picky myself, I am not even close to having had sex partners numbering in the 1000's, and potguts are just fine by me (they're fun to poke and blow raspberries on). My straight friends think I'm a big 'ho; my gay friends think I am a priss. This difference in opinion tickles me no end.

[handy]

"With no man in the relationship constantly pushing for sex, one would assume that lesbians have sex infrequently. Is this true?"

Not as frequent as men, I have been told.

However, in my exposure, lesbians usually have a small, tight community, so they often all have the same partners at various times, after all, there aren't that many partners to choose from. So you often get someones ex.

[Daowajan]

*pokes head in*

If you're screwing someone who's been in a relationship prior to screwing you, then you've got someone's ex.

[Neurotik]

Originally posted by iampunha
But please don't assume that being bisexual means you have more options for getting laid. It means that you're not restricted by gender, but by no means does that equate to sex. Um...and by not being restricted by gender have thereby doubled your pool of potential partners giving you more options for getting laid.

Or did I miss something?

[Farren]

Except that there's a section of the population that won't engage in such activities with someone who is bisexual; thus that section is out of consideration. And if that section is greater than 50% of the population (no idea how big it is, personally), then being bisexual would not increase the number of potential partners.

[Poysyn]

I think that anyone (gay, straight, bi or otherwise) can go out any night of the week and "get laid".

It all comes down to standards. If all you want is a quick f***, you are guaranteed to get it, you may not be particularly excited about who you end up with, straight or not.

[Kyla]

Anyone have a copy of Stephen Pinker's How the Mind Works handy? The copy I read was from the library.

Anyway, in the book, he mentions a study of gay men and women's sexual activity. Because I don't have the book with me, I can't give you the exact numbers, but the difference was huge. So not to say that no lesbians get it on a lot, but in general, yeah, gay men do have more sex than women, and with more partners.

[astro]

Originally posted by Farren
Except that there's a section of the population that won't engage in such activities with someone who is bisexual; thus that section is out of consideration. And if that section is greater than 50% of the population (no idea how big it is, personally), then being bisexual would not increase the number of potential partners.

Well that would have to be one chatty bi-sexual ...

Non-bi-sexual: "I'm hot, you're hot lets do it!

Bi-sexual: "I want you too, but before we proceed the bi-sexual code requires that I give you fair warning that I am bi-sexual so that you may rescind your offer if this fact offends you.

Non-bi-sexual: Ack! Damn right it does! You put your winky in there? Later!

Bi-sexual: Wait Cathy! Come back!

[TVGuy]

IME, gay has nothing to do with it.

The young and pretty flock to the young and pretty.

The old wish for the young and pretty and settle for something a bit more realistic.

The stuck up and arrogant go home alone every night.

This kind of behavior is common, I think, in a large, large percentage of the overall population, regardless of gender, sexual identity, whatever.

Personally, I just think it proves that we're all more alike than different.

(OK, OK, so I got some last night, but it won't last...)

[handy]

"Homosexuality (male) = male libido squared"

Let's see...according to some old book at my library, I read years ago when such stuff seemed even remotely interesting, on average, a straight man has 25 sexual partners in his lifetime & a gay man averaged 1000 (Thats the average, not the per person).

Thus, according to your equation, that would be 25x25=625.

I guess your estimate is a bit off :-)

[Walloon]

I don't believe that claim of an average of 1000 partners for a minute.

[Sublight]

Originally posted by Pythagras


On what do you base the presumption that women have no libido whilst guys will randomly hump the nearest warm blooded mammal with 2 boobs?

My marriage.

[iampunha]

Originally posted by Neurotik
Um...and by not being restricted by gender have thereby doubled your pool of potential partners giving you more options for getting laid.

Or did I miss something?

Lemme see if I can explain it to you this way:

I am not universally attracted to women. That is to say, if I were to see a representative cross-section of human adult females from around the world, I can pretty much guarantee you that I would not be physically attracted to all of them. The same can be said for men.

Let's assume someone who is equally attracted to men and women, and assume a completely equal population split: 49.9% male and 49.9% female (allowing for some people whose genetic identity is, like, XXY or something like that. Rare but not nonexistent). That means this person is sexually attracted to almost the entire planet, which *does* give that person more options *assuming the other people are willing*.

That assumption, I think, is what gets a lot of people thinking that being bisexual gives you twice as much of a chance to get laid. Because firstly you have the people who aren't attracted to men period. And then you have the people who are already married or otherwise taken (including people like married men and priests and nuns and suchlike). Then there are people who won't knowingly enter into a relationship with someone who is bisexual (for the reasons I outlined above, for others, whatever). And you *also* have the people who, while this man is sexually attracted to, he wouldn't have sex with.

You're left with a really small percent of the population.

So, okay. Let's see how empirically this can be put: given a heterosexual man and a bisexual man, and assuming no difference in who they are attracted to in the female world, the bisexual man is attracted to more people. By *no* means does that equate to getting laid more often.

Does that make sense, or did I just waste 15 minutes of my time and your time?:)

And finally, astro:

"Well that would have to be one chatty bi-sexual ...

Non-bi-sexual: "I'm hot, you're hot lets do it!

Bi-sexual: "I want you too, but before we proceed the bi-sexual code requires that I give you fair warning that I am bi-sexual so that you may rescind your offer if this fact offends you.

Non-bi-sexual: Ack! Damn right it does! You put your winky in there? Later!

Bi-sexual: Wait Cathy! Come back!"

While I cannot and will not speak for any bisexual person other than myself, I would not feel terribly comfortable having sex with someone who didn't know that I was bisexual. Part of that is wanting the other person to trust me, and part of it is that fear that they won't want to be with me anymore after they eventually *do* find out. And that would make me feel far worse later on than earlier. Every SO I've had has known I'm bi.

[Kyla]

Originally posted by Walloon
I don't believe that claim of an average of 1000 partners for a minute.

In the study mentioned in How the Mind Works, as referenced in my above post, a small percentage of gay men had had over 1000 partners. But none (or was it only one?) of the lesbians had had that many partners. I remember this distinctly.

I'll go get the book at the library again tomorrow so I can be a little more reliable with my numbers.

[KellyM]

Originally posted by handy
Not as frequent as men, I have been told.Only if you count masturbating. My girlfriend and I make love about ten times a week unless one of us is sick or out of town on business.

[KellyM]

Originally posted by Neurotik
Um...and by not being restricted by gender have thereby doubled your pool of potential partners giving you more options for getting laid.

Or did I miss something?
Yes, you missed the obvious. Your typical straight man will not have sex with any woman he finds. He has criteria of some sort. One of them is that his potential partner must be female. Your typical bisexual also has criteria. It's just that gender is not one of them, at least not directly (some bisexuals have gender-sensitive criteria).

Bisexuals can be extremely picky or wanton sluts, just like straights and gays.

[Gary T]

Um...and by not being restricted by gender have thereby doubled your pool of potential partners giving you more options for getting laid. Or did I miss something?

What you missed is, I believe, a critical point--only a small percentage of folks (that being the ones who are homosexual and bisexual) would even CONSIDER doing it with a member of their own sex. It far from doubles a bisexual's options, I would guess increases them by 10% at the max, possibly less than half that.

[Neurotik]

Originally posted by iampunha
So, okay. Let's see how empirically this can be put: given a heterosexual man and a bisexual man, and assuming no difference in who they are attracted to in the female world, the bisexual man is attracted to more people. By *no* means does that equate to getting laid more often.

Does that make sense, or did I just waste 15 minutes of my time and your time?:)
Right. That's pretty much what I was driving at. You just stated it about ten times clearer than I did. :)

Originally posted by KellyM
Yes, you missed the obvious. Your typical straight man will not have sex with any woman he finds. He has criteria of some sort. One of them is that his potential partner must be female. Your typical bisexual also has criteria. It's just that gender is not one of them, at least not directly (some bisexuals have gender-sensitive criteria).

Bisexuals can be extremely picky or wanton sluts, just like straights and gays
Well, yes. But by eliminating the gender criteria (assuming the other criteria are roughly the same for the hetero and the bi) you have just increased your pool of candidates. That doesn't necessarily mean that all bis have the same tastes or that they will all just jump in the sack with whoever.

Gary T - you are right. I didn't think of that. But the end effect that a bi person will have a larger pool of options than either a pure hetero or a pure homo, assuming that all other criteria are about the same.

So a wanton hetero with no standards will get laid more often than a choosy bisexual who is looking for a continuous relationship. And of course, a wanton hetero with no standards will probably get laid pretty much as often as a bi with no standards. So it all depends on the real life situation, but in theory...

Anyway, I have no point. And I'm babbling. As usual.

OK. I'm done.

Sorry.

[matt_mcl]

Any gay man I know who goes someplace, meets someone, and "engages in a purely physical encounter" on more than maybe one rare occasion of desperation would be promptly called a slut or whore by me and lose a large amount of my respect.

This isn't the pit, so fill in my response for yourself.

[iampunha]

Originally posted by Gary T
What you missed is, I believe, a critical point--only a small percentage of folks (that being the ones who are homosexual and bisexual) would even CONSIDER doing it with a member of their own sex. It far from doubles a bisexual's options, I would guess increases them by 10% at the max, possibly less than half that. [/B]

There is also the fact that some people, knowing a person is bisexual as opposed to straight or gay, wish to sever whatever relationship there is with that person. And if one is not into having casual sex, this cuts down dramatically on partner options.

[Homebrew]

Originally posted by TVGuy
The stuck up and arrogant go home alone every night. Then there are some of us who have some self-esteem issues and depression, not quite completely masked by the "happy face" and alcohol, which seems to be off-putting and sends you home alone.

:(

[PolishSausage]

OHMYGOD! This tread is making me sooooooo horny!!!

[Mockingbird]

Originally posted by Ooner
Any gay man I know who goes someplace, meets someone, and "engages in a purely physical encounter" on more than maybe one rare occasion of desperation would be promptly called a slut or whore by me and lose a large amount of my respect.

However, it seems that I'm one of the few people that think like this. In most cases, you're right and nobody really cares how much of a slut a gay guy is. It's expected. :(

1) Regarding losing your respect by virtue of sluttiness: la-te-dah.

2) So, you rely on a sterotype of the perception of gay men? Lovely. Maybe you need to deal more with gay men and not fall back on an unsubstantiated myth.

Not that there's anything wrong with being a slut. Being an ethical slut can be one of the great joys of life. YAY SLUTS!

:D

[Mockingbird]

Originally posted by Homebrew
Then there are some of us who have some self-esteem issues and depression, not quite completely masked by the "happy face" and alcohol, which seems to be off-putting and sends you home alone.

:(

Awwwww. *hug*


"C'mon a my house, a my house, I'm gonna make you happy. Come on a my house a my house, I'm going to give you everything."

;)