Male 46. I would have no problem being friends with someone like you described.
So they’re at the other end of the bell-curve? So what?
I already have this friend; he’s called my dad.
I’m not sure if he’s been with literally hundreds but the number is way up there, and sometimes it can get awkward since lately he’s been into women who are less than half his age, which means my peer group. He introduced me to one of his girlfriends at a bar a few weeks ago - she was 23 and looked about 17. He also has girlfriends in several different countries in Eastern Europe (he travels there frequently) and he recently had a brief fling with an actress while on a trip to California. On top of all this, for some reason either coincidental or deliberate, he has a habit of getting involved with already-married women. I think at least 5 of the women he’s been with this year so far have been married.
Anyone who lives a life like this is going to have a lot of drama and a fair share of bad experiences among the good ones; because of this, in recent years, I’ve taken on almost a psychiatric role to my father. He takes me to dinner, he drinks beers and then rambles for an hour or so about all of his issues with women. I can’t object; I always get a good meal and a few drinks out of it. But these are what amounts to his psychiatry sessions. He basically just talks at me, and I sit there and listen to him, nodding my head and wondering if this is going to be me in 25 years.
As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I had maybe a couple of thousand sexual partners from the early 60s to the late 80s, when I met my partner. This was fairly common at that time for urban gay men, and my statistics pale compared to many others. But my partner and I have both been monogamous since the night we met, 21.5 years ago.
For the record . . . neither of us lost his mother at at early age (mine lived to see me turn 60, his is still alive); nor had we been abused. Nor do we have any deep-seated psychological issues. Nor do we talk about our sexual histories much. Nor do we live lives filled with drama.
I want to thank all of you who don’t have a problem with this. And to the others: of course you are entitled to your opinion, but some of you are making assumptions and generalizations that aren’t necessarily valid.
I’m always quicker to think ill of other men than of women. Admittedly that says more about me than the men.
I’d have far less of a problem with someone who’s slept with hundreds of people and is discreet about it than I would with someone who is monogamous and wants to tell me all the details.
I don’t care how many sex partners my friends have. I care about their conversational skills.
The guys I knew who had lost their mothers were both straight (though I think it’s interesting that this variable has popped up anedotally so ofetn in this thread).
I think it’s different for gay men because the opportunities are so much greater. Most straight guys would probably have hundreds or thousands of partners if it was easy. Being gay is like a straight guy being a rock star. The algebra is completely different. If there were clubs or gyms where straight guys could go and find nothing but horny, naked women cruising for sex, industry would come to a halt.
I’m curous. I’m sure it might be obvious after enough conversation that someone had “a lot” of sex partners. But “hundreds”? If we’re talking about someone who quotes stats about their sex lives, I don’t think that person my friend. OTOH, if it’s an attractive woman, I’d wrap myself in placstic and screw her in a heartbeat.
Almost every promiscuous person I’ve known has been a bit too one dimensional for me to ever seriously consider having a close, meaningful friendship with them. These types of people generally seem to want those around them to view their sexual conquests as a part of the definition of their character (how else would we have any idea how many people they’ve slept with?)
I’ve never gotten remotely close to feeling a meaningful friendship connection with a promiscuous woman, but one of my closest male friends was, in our younger years, quite promiscuous.
I’m 26, male.
Yes, it’s totally different for gay men, and was much more so pre-AIDS. Sex had virtually no risk attached to it, and in urban gay culture it was almost mandatory to act out or “sexual liberation.” I’m thinking that many people in this thread are younger, and don’t remember the “sexual revolution” of the late 60s through early 80s, and all the repression we were overcoming. It’s sad that the next generation has apparently turned out to be so judgmental.
Wouldn’t be a problem with me unless it became a problem with the relationship.
Like, if the person walks away from me at a restaurant to hook up with someone they find there, I’m going to be pissed.
That seems a little odd. In my experience, guys-only outings always include the proviso that if any single member of the group is presented with the reasonable opportunity to get laid, all other members are expected to understand, encourage, and if posisble assist him. The exception would be things like, oh, the post-funeral get–togethers my cousins & I have started doing as the elder-generation Rhymers go to the choir invisible.
I like to get laid too. So much that if I met a girl who wanted to have sex with me, I wouldn’t kick her to the curb afterwards.
Everybody likes to get laid, so why would anyone who really likes to get laid constantly dump people who wanna lay them? It’s not the hooking up with the new person that shows the damage, it’s the dumping of the old.
I could be friends with someone who has had hundreds of sexual partners, or someone who has had one, or none. I have more trouble being friends with someone with no insight into how their sexual actions affect people around them. ( Like a woman I knew who wanted to tell me how her vacation with her boyfriend was ruined because his wife was SO MEAN to her )
It doesn’t have to involve kicking someone to the curb and the pain of getting dumped. I could just be two people who enjoy each other for a while, both understanding that it’s not necessarily leading anywhere . . . but keeping that option open.
But that kind of attitude leads to dozens of sexual partners, not hundreds. Hundreds means that you meet someone you like enough to have sex with them, but instead of calling them next week to have sex with them again you’re out looking for a new person to have sex with. What makes the first one boring, but the next one interesting? And then when you’re done with the next one, the next one, and so on?
If both parties understand that it’s a hookup that may or may not happen again, why is that a problem?
But why isn’t it happening again? If it doesn’t happen again because you didn’t like it, that makes sense. But if you did like it wouldn’t it make sense to do it again? And again and again and again?
As I said, I understand wanting to get laid. So why would you tell that other person that getting laid tonight was fine, but you weren’t interested in sleeping with them ever again? It just doesn’t make sense–if it’s about getting laid.
:rolleyes: Oh yes, we’re all uptight prudes who make Focus On Your Own Damn Family’s views on sex look libral.
What’s so freaking “repressed” about wanting to settle down with someone that you honestly love more then words can say? God, when you can get a shiver down your spine, just having someone say " I love you" or just cuddling with someone who you love dearly, that beats annoymous meet ups for sex by a MILE.
How do you know that most of the “sexual revolution” wasn’t just sowing wild oats?
What’s the fun in that?