My guess is the person who left that message meant that the relationships that he was in were monogamous. You can have many monogamous relationships. This would be the equivalent in the straight community with having serial marriages--they are (hopefully) monogamous with their current spouse, but get a divorce, remarry and are monogamous again. In terms of the quote: I feel that if society is voting to not allow gays to marry and be legally monogamous, then society shouldn't take issue with the fact that some gay couples are not monogamous. I don't think society can have it both ways. They can't complain that gays and lesbians are promiscuous while at the same time not allowing them to be legally recognized couples. Then again, that same article states: "Large-scale studies executed in the United States over the past 40 years have found that at least 37 percent of men and 29 percent of women have engaged in sex outside their marital relationship." So marrying won't necessarily make one more susceptible to monogamy!
Laura
· 2 years ago
Interesting set of comments and reflections. Fact is, I've forever heard that women tend to be "more" monogamous but eventually one or both partners venture out...which, I suppose, was acceptable. I don't get it. Aren't we really talking about having an "open" relationship if the decision is to have outside sexual partners? That is not monogamy.
Laura
· 2 years ago
Interesting set of comments and reflections. Fact is, I've forever heard that women tend to be "more" monogamous but eventually one or both partners venture out...which, I suppose, was acceptable. I don't get it. Aren't we really talking about having an "open" relationship if the decision is to have outside sexual partners? That is not monogamy.
kevin
· 2 years ago
My guess is the person who left that message meant that the relationships that he was in were monogamous. You can have many monogamous relationships. This would be the equivalent in the straight community with having serial marriages--they are (hopefully) monogamous with their current spouse, but get a divorce, remarry and are monogamous again. In terms of the quote: I feel that if society is voting to not allow gays to marry and be legally monogamous, then society shouldn't take issue with the fact that some gay couples are not monogamous. I don't think society can have it both ways. They can't complain that gays and lesbians are promiscuous while at the same time not allowing them to be legally recognized couples. Then again, that same article states: "Large-scale studies executed in the United States over the past 40 years have found that at least 37 percent of men and 29 percent of women have engaged in sex outside their marital relationship." So marrying won't necessarily make one more susceptible to monogamy!
Randy
· 2 years ago
I just looked it up on dictionary.com and it seems we are both right but it's still wrong.
mo·nog·a·my /m??n?g?mi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[muh-nog-uh-mee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. marriage with only one person at a time. Compare bigamy, polygamy. 2. Zoology. the practice of having only one mate. 3. the practice of marrying only once during life.
I think MOST of society thinks of definition number 3 when they hear of monogamy ... or at least they did. Technically you are right with definition number 1. Either way though, any sex outside of either of those definitions violates them ... in my opinion.
So that could explain the caller but the redefinition from the AIDS organization is gratuitous justification of promiscuity.
As for getting married not stopping having sex outside of marriage for heterosexuals ... Blaming society for bad behavior and/or pointing to the failures of heterosexual couples to redefine marriage doesn't fly with me.
I would agree that there is as much, or more, promiscuity in our culture among heterosexuals but I completely disagree with your inference that heterosexual marriage is not a deterrent.
Randy
· 2 years ago
Laura, you are right. "Open Relationship" was exactly the words used. I have never understood how anyone in any situation thought that was ok. I thought that when I identified as gay and still do.
kevin
· 2 years ago
If people are forced to live in committed relationships without all the legal bonds, then there is no reason for them not to make up whatever kind of relationship they want to have. I don't think anyone can call people promiscuous or complain about it while at the same time trying to make sure they cannot have legally recognized relationships. If straight marriage is a deterrent to promiscuitiy, then what reason is there to say that gay marriage wouldn't be a deterrent as well? That article from the AIDS organization was not justifying promiscuity. It was just reporting on the way people behave. It didn't push for one behavior or another.
Mike Ensley
· 2 years ago
Randy, my experience reflects pretty much the same thing as yours. In 5 years of pursuing homosexuality, I knew many couples who lived together in "committed" relationships, though monogamy was never part of the arrangement. I only ever present this as what it is--my own personal experience--and not as in-depth research or anything like that. But, I think it's noteworthy.
Mike Ensley
· 2 years ago
Randy, my experience reflects pretty much the same thing as yours. In 5 years of pursuing homosexuality, I knew many couples who lived together in "committed" relationships, though monogamy was never part of the arrangement.
I only ever present this as what it is--my own personal experience--and not as in-depth research or anything like that. But, I think it's noteworthy.
Randy
· 2 years ago
I am on the same page with you Mike. I don't claim my experience combined with yours is the standard for the whole of gay identified males.
Even so, it does reflect a witness to the real problem of promiscuity within that population. Regardless of the fact that is mirrored in our culture in heterosexual environments, a problem is a problem, one isn't better or worse than the other, they are still problems.
kevin
· 2 years ago
If people are forced to live in committed relationships without all the legal bonds, then there is no reason for them not to make up whatever kind of relationship they want to have. I don't think anyone can call people promiscuous or complain about it while at the same time trying to make sure they cannot have legally recognized relationships. If straight marriage is a deterrent to promiscuitiy, then what reason is there to say that gay marriage wouldn't be a deterrent as well? That article from the AIDS organization was not justifying promiscuity. It was just reporting on the way people behave. It didn't push for one behavior or another.
Randy
· 2 years ago
The only person responsible for promiscuity is the person who can't keep their pants on.
I am for marriage as it has always been and I am very concerned about gay promiscuity disguising itself in words that convey a totally different meaning to the rest of the world.
As we see on this thread a gay male couple could say they have a "wonderful monogamous long term relationship" and in reality they are sleeping with whomever they want. That is not the same "monogamy" that most people understand.
It is completely consistent to want to preserve marriage and also be concerned for the welfare of promiscuous men who identify as gay... and promiscuity in general.
But in the end, state sanction or no, it is your own personal responsibility to not sleep around or to be honest if you do.
Ron
· 2 years ago
Me and another guy was in a "relationship", but he was seeing other guys as well. "open relationships" do not work. I know of other guys who are together and have "open" relationship. It can get nasty.
Randy
· 2 years ago
Thanks for adding your thoughts Ron. I saw the same type of thing... it can get real hurtful.
Mike Ensley
· 2 years ago
The idea that giving legal marital status to gay relationships would cause there to be less promiscuity doesn't fly with me. It certainly never stopped the heterosexual men who've cheated on their wives. The fact that this argument even exists is evidence to me that promiscuity is as big a problem in the gay male community as I suppose it is.
Mike Ensley
· 2 years ago
The idea that giving legal marital status to gay relationships would cause there to be less promiscuity doesn't fly with me. It certainly never stopped the heterosexual men who've cheated on their wives.
The fact that this argument even exists is evidence to me that promiscuity is as big a problem in the gay male community as I suppose it is.
All Comments
In terms of the quote: I feel that if society is voting to not allow gays to marry and be legally monogamous, then society shouldn't take issue with the fact that some gay couples are not monogamous. I don't think society can have it both ways. They can't complain that gays and lesbians are promiscuous while at the same time not allowing them to be legally recognized couples.
Then again, that same article states: "Large-scale studies executed in the United States over the past 40 years have found that at least 37 percent of men and 29 percent of women have engaged in sex outside their marital relationship." So marrying won't necessarily make one more susceptible to monogamy!
In terms of the quote: I feel that if society is voting to not allow gays to marry and be legally monogamous, then society shouldn't take issue with the fact that some gay couples are not monogamous. I don't think society can have it both ways. They can't complain that gays and lesbians are promiscuous while at the same time not allowing them to be legally recognized couples.
Then again, that same article states: "Large-scale studies executed in the United States over the past 40 years have found that at least 37 percent of men and 29 percent of women have engaged in sex outside their marital relationship." So marrying won't necessarily make one more susceptible to monogamy!
I think MOST of society thinks of definition number 3 when they hear of monogamy ... or at least they did. Technically you are right with definition number 1. Either way though, any sex outside of either of those definitions violates them ... in my opinion.
So that could explain the caller but the redefinition from the AIDS organization is gratuitous justification of promiscuity.
As for getting married not stopping having sex outside of marriage for heterosexuals ... Blaming society for bad behavior and/or pointing to the failures of heterosexual couples to redefine marriage doesn't fly with me.
I would agree that there is as much, or more, promiscuity in our culture among heterosexuals but I completely disagree with your inference that heterosexual marriage is not a deterrent.
I don't think anyone can call people promiscuous or complain about it while at the same time trying to make sure they cannot have legally recognized relationships.
If straight marriage is a deterrent to promiscuitiy, then what reason is there to say that gay marriage wouldn't be a deterrent as well?
That article from the AIDS organization was not justifying promiscuity. It was just reporting on the way people behave. It didn't push for one behavior or another.
I only ever present this as what it is--my own personal experience--and not as in-depth research or anything like that. But, I think it's noteworthy.
I only ever present this as what it is--my own personal experience--and not as in-depth research or anything like that. But, I think it's noteworthy.
Even so, it does reflect a witness to the real problem of promiscuity within that population. Regardless of the fact that is mirrored in our culture in heterosexual environments, a problem is a problem, one isn't better or worse than the other, they are still problems.
I don't think anyone can call people promiscuous or complain about it while at the same time trying to make sure they cannot have legally recognized relationships.
If straight marriage is a deterrent to promiscuitiy, then what reason is there to say that gay marriage wouldn't be a deterrent as well?
That article from the AIDS organization was not justifying promiscuity. It was just reporting on the way people behave. It didn't push for one behavior or another.
I am for marriage as it has always been and I am very concerned about gay promiscuity disguising itself in words that convey a totally different meaning to the rest of the world.
As we see on this thread a gay male couple could say they have a "wonderful monogamous long term relationship" and in reality they are sleeping with whomever they want. That is not the same "monogamy" that most people understand.
It is completely consistent to want to preserve marriage and also be concerned for the welfare of promiscuous men who identify as gay... and promiscuity in general.
But in the end, state sanction or no, it is your own personal responsibility to not sleep around or to be honest if you do.
"open relationships" do not work. I know of other guys who are together and have "open" relationship. It can get nasty.
The fact that this argument even exists is evidence to me that promiscuity is as big a problem in the gay male community as I suppose it is.
The fact that this argument even exists is evidence to me that promiscuity is as big a problem in the gay male community as I suppose it is.