No. Its funny, but a lot of gay people have sex for the same reason straight people do, and I’m not talking reproduction.
That means bisexuals don’t exist, right?
jesse, I would very much like to know what readings you have been doing.
My Sociology studies for my degree have focused on Human Sexuality and I have never read anything to support your stance on homosexuals needing to engage in taboo sexual acts to experience full pleasure. Nor do any of the homosexuals of my acquantaince say anything of the sort.
As andygirl said, they have sex for the same nonreproductive reasons straights do.
Originally posted by Sterra
That means bisexuals don’t exist, right?
Wrong. Obviously bisexuals exist. Everything else being equal, Gays have more sex than Bisexuals, because more total testosterone is involved. Bisexuals have more sex than Lesbians for the same reason, therefore Lesbians have the least sex among the three groups.
Bisexuals have about equal conflict with both males and females, therefore they are attracted to both genders (see OP).
jesse
Um, cite?
Originally posted by Arden Ranger
-
jesse, I would very much like to know what readings you have been doing.
-
My Sociology studies for my degree have focused on Human Sexuality and I have never read anything to support your stance on homosexuals needing to engage in taboo sexual acts to experience full pleasure.
-
As andygirl said, they have sex for the same nonreproductive reasons straights do.
- Readings:
A. C.A. Tripp—Book (“The Homosexual Matrix”)(McGraw-Hill) copyright by Psychological Research Associates, Inc. (1975)
The chapters I find most interesting are chapter 2 “Biological Considerations”, chapter 3 "Inversion and Homosexuality, chapter 6 “Sex Techniques”. C.A. Tripp is or was a sex researcher and psychologist. I have not been able to locate him, nor have I been able to find anything else he has written. I discovered his theory of Sexual Resistance reading Forum Magazine back in the 70’s. The big name sex researchers at that time were amazed at his insight, because he was a relatively unknown researcher, although he did submit some of his research to Alfred Kinsey.
B. Robert Stoller—Psychoanalyst turned Clinical Ethnographer, studying mostly human sexuality. I think he wrote about 8 books on sexuality, most of them dealing with sex workers, and pornography.
C. Nancy Friday—Non-Phd. researcher and popularizer of sexual fantasies, sexual jealousy, mother/daughter relationships, and the power of beauty.
D. John Money—leading expert on the Paraphilias.
E. Candace Pert—Book (“Molecules of Emotion”) and audio tape (“Your Body is your Subconsious Mind”) Co-discoverer of Endorphins, sex researcher, neuro-peptide researcher, and is currently working on a HIV cure (Peptide T).
F. Randy Thornhill—Book (“A Natural History Of Rape”—biolgical bases of sexual coercion. Also any of his research articles written in the past ten years (studied insects prior to his study of humans).
- and 3.—Read above, and my OP.
I am attempting to combine the theories and facts of the above researchers and writers into one theory.
If you can track down C.A. Tripp (assuming that he is still alive) please let me know. If you can find his book, I think you will find it most interesting, whether you agree with him or not.
jesse
Note -small ecxerpt of copyrighted material whic can legally be posted here-Around 1980, Nicholas Groth, director of Forensic Mental Health Associates, established a typology of rapists. Groth arrived at his conclusions by distilling his observations of more than 3,000 sex offenders over the course of 25 years of practice. (Most of his patients, Groth points out, were not sexually deprived at the time they committed rape, thereby exploding that most common of rape myths: that men rape because they’re unable to get sex any other way.)
In a general sense, rapists fall into three motivational types: anger, power, and sadism. In anger assaults, the rapist is getting even for “some wrong he feels has been done to him, by life, by his victim at the time. He’s in a frame of rage and attacks someone sexually.” The anger rape is usually unpremeditated and impulsive, but the impulse drives the rapist into excessive force: the victim is punched, choked, and kicked into submission. Most such offenders derive little pleasure from the act (emphasis mine0, says Groth, but “they want to degrade their victims, and sex is something bad, dirty, the worst thing you could do to someone. That reflects a lot of our values in society.”-End of excerpt
On another point, The current edition of the DSM does NOT list homosexuality as a disorder.
1
“I wish!”
- Harvey Milk
Mbwahahahaha!
(by the way, you don’t need to capitalize so much. honest.)
My post last night was eaten by the internet.
Granted I haven’t read this whole thread yet (will soon), but if you’re going to include homosexuality, wouldn’t you also then include heterosexuality? After all, a person of the opposite sex is required for sexual stimulation, no?
Esprix
Originally posted by matt_mcl
“I wish!”
- Harvey Milk
Although heterosexual and homosexual men desire new sexual partners in equal number, homosexual men actually have far more new partners because their sex partners are men, who share their desire for new partners. (Bailey, J., S.Gaulin, Y. Agyei, and B. Gladue. 1994. Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66: 1081-1093).
jesse
i am so glad i didn’t read this thread.
So you’re not saying that gay men have more sex than straight men…you’re saying that gay men have sex with more seperate partners than straight men?
No, the “experts” ceased to consider homosexuality a disorder when it became clear that homosexuality was not a mental illness. A paraphilia only exists when the individual is unable to achieve arousal without the assistance of the “fetish”, and when this creates psychosocial stress of some sort for that particular individual. Most homosexuals can become aroused without the assistance of a same-sex partner, and as such do not qualify as paraphiliacs. Even those who do require their partner for arousal may not experience any psychosocial stress and thus, again, do not qualify. Since the vast majority of homosexuals do not qualify as paraphiliacs, categorization of homosexuality as a paraphilia is not merely politically incorrect, but scientifically wrong.
I smell an agenda…
Originally posted by jesse morrison
Although heterosexual and homosexual men desire new sexual partners in equal number, homosexual men actually have far more new partners because their sex partners are men, who share their desire for new partners.
Originally posted by Captain Amazing
- So you’re not saying that gay men have more sex than straight men. 2. You’re saying that gay men have sex with more seperate partners than straight men?
-
No, that is what I am saying.
-
Yes, that is what I am saying.
In straight sex, the females pick and choose, regardless of the males desire, or the females desire, thus less sex. Gays do not pick and choose as much as straight females, relatively speaking. Also two gays have about twice as much total testosterone envolved, awaiting the spark of sexual resistance, with the resulting sexual excitement.
jesse
Well, but Jesse, the study you cited doesn’t claim that gay men have more sex, just that they have sex with more partners.
And, I agree with KellyM. Homosexuality can’t be called a paraphilia, any more than heterosexuality can. Paraphilia is the sexualization of non-sexual objects, to the extent that the person requires these non-sexual objects to be stimulated and this causes distress. Homosexuality does not do this. The homosexual, like the heterosexual, is attracted to other individuals. In other words, there’s no difference between a gay man and a straight woman being sexually attracted to a man. Gay people can, of course, have paraphilias.
Originally posted by Captain Amazing
-
Well, but Jesse, the study you cited doesn’t claim that gay men have more sex, just that they have sex with more partners.
-
And, I agree with KellyM. Homosexuality can’t be called a paraphilia, any more than heterosexuality can.
-
Paraphilia is the sexualization of non-sexual objects, to the extent that the person requires these non-sexual objects to be stimulated and this causes distress.
-
Homosexuality does not do this. The homosexual, like the heterosexual, is attracted to other individuals. In other words, there’s no difference between a gay man and a straight woman being sexually attracted to a man.
-
O.K., but I still say gays have more sex than straights.
I’m sure some researcher has done a study that indicates my position. I think you will agree that the general consensus is that gays have more sex than straights, because they do not have as much discretion as female straights. -
Agreed, and I think I posted either on this thread or another related thread that my position was that it applied to both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I think it is a matter of opportunity. I choose females over males, because females are available to me. Theoretically, if I did not have this opportunity, and selected a male, I would most likely fantasize that they were a female, since I am straight. The same thing would apply to a gay. Sexual taboos are conceptualized from genes or memes, or a combination of both. I think you will agree that in our culture heterosexuality is not a taboo, but homosexuality is. If a taboo is used for sexual resistance to spark sexual excitement that leads to addiction to the taboo, then I would call this a paraphilia. Someone mentioned paraphilias being listed in the DMS as mental illnesses. The DMS is a scam to get money from insurance companies. I think most therapists will agree with this, but have no other alternative, in order to get paid by the insurance companies. I’m not sure how the DMS (or is it DSM) got started, but would be interesting to research. I think the paraphilias are legal problems, not mental problems. If everyone thought of sexual fantasies as being paraphilias, then we would all be mentally ill.
-
I think you are incorrect about paraphilias being exclusively non-sexual objects.
-
See no. 2.
jesse
Well, the DSM is just a book put out by the American Psychiatric Association that gives diagnostic criteria for various conditions. It might be used by unethical people, but it also can be a useful reference tool, because it gives a common criteria for the conditions.
When I said that a paraphilia is the “making of a non-sexual object sexual”, what I meant is that it takes an object, like leather, or an action, like rubbing up against strangers, which is not sexual, and making it into a sexual object for the paraphiliac. This can cause legal problems, in cases like pedophilia or voyerism, but something like a foot fetish, for example, probably wouldn’t cause legal problems for the fetishist.
Sexual fantasies are not paraphilias. A paraphilia only exists if the trigger is neccesary for the action, and it is not otherwise sexual. For example, if I fantasize about someone performing oral sex on me, that is not a paraphilia. If I fantasize about someone putting whipped cream on my penis and licking it off, that is not a paraphilia. If, on the other hand, the only way I can be sexually excited is if somebody puts whipped cream on my penis and licks it off, that’s a paraphilia.
So, in other words, you have defined “paraphilia” to mean something other than what most people mean by it.
Before continuing this discussion, please let us know of any other words which you are using in other than their common sense or meaning, and for each such word provide a “translation guide” so that the rest of us can understand what you are saying.
(Of course, I have qualms about there being any hope for a meaningful discussion about theories of abnormal sexuality with someone who doesn’t even know the correct abbreviation for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual or the definition of “mental illness”, and who invokes “memes” for any reason other than amusement value…)