Straight men have a lot of gay sex, study shows

[BobBKK]

On 10/20/2018 at 12:29 PM, dennis123 said:

Nice excuse, I would've said the same if I were you.

 

Would you have commented if the topic was 'Gay men have a lot of straight sex, study shows'?

 

Makes me think why there are no studies on that!

Yes I would its an interesting topic that can be read by gays or non-gays.  You seem to have a hang up.

[taiwanatoa]

It is pathetic ,and tragic even, how the whole world has bought into this gay/not gay ( or worse,"straight ") nonsense. All over the world men are men and are perfectly capable of engaging in different kinds of sex acts.

[Rimmer]

Some troll post removed. Keep posting like that and you will be removed as well

[bbi1]

On 5/1/2018 at 3:05 PM, Krataiboy said:

Nothing particularly revelationary about this Pink piece. Numerous surveys have shown that many, if not most, men who identify as heterosexual have a sexual experience with another man at some time in their lives. The same goes for women, only more so.

What a load of crap. They ain't straight if they are doing other dudes. They're either gay or bisexual, not at all straight.

[HighPriority]

On 5/1/2018 at 5:35 PM, Songlaw said:

I have an earth-shattering newsflash for any "straight" men having gay sex... Chiefly, you aren't straight. You likely never were straight, and will likely never be straight without some sort of serious intervention. I would maintain that even "experimental" gay sex isn't possible for a straight male, due to an aversive reflex triggered by the thought of sexual involvement with other males. I know that some will argue, but I would suggest they refer back to the first couple of sentences in this comment. I have been as open to new and interesting experiences as is humanly possible throughout my life, but as far as I can determine, this is a physiological barrier that cannot be overridden by a neurotypically-wired, heterosexual male. 

Sorry to quote from page 1, but FMD !

The barrier you are referring to is called homophobia... 

[utalkin2me]

_{WHere did they do this study, in a prison?}

 

_{I do not believe those numbers. I think guys that have sex with men are gay or extremely repressed or anxious to have a sexual experience.} 

[pedro01]

On 7/29/2018 at 4:59 AM, Scott said:

No, sexual behavior is not against nature.   Nature does not complain.   It is based on your Christian theology that made an arbitrary decision about what is or isn't acceptable.   Your mouth was designed by nature for the ingestion of nutrients.   Nature doesn't mind if you use it for speaking.   Nature doesn't complain if you use for kissing, nor does she complain if you kiss a male or female, or if you use it for sex, so it's not against nature. Heck, Nature doesn't even care if you use your mouth to pull the pin out of a grenade and go all Rambo on others.   Nature simply doesn't care.   You care, but nature doesn't.   Your religion cares and it has told you that it's against Nature.   It's not.  

"Your mouth was designed by nature for the ingestion of nutrients.   Nature doesn't mind if you use it for speaking."

 

Actually - your mouth was designed by nature for a number of activities. Speaking is one of them. To suggest that nature designed the mouth only for eating is ludicrous.

 

What is clear is that nature did design the sexual organs for reproduction.  

 

Nature is not a thinking entity, so is not able to care or otherwise.

 

Homosexual sex is not what nature intended. Sex is for reproduction. So it's actually quite fair to say that homosexuality is not natures design.

 

Not that it matters, nor should anyone get upset about it. Nature didn't make us for hang-gliding either. 

 

But homosexuality is not natural. It's against evolutionary design. Evolutions purpose is to perpetuate the species. Homosexuality does a pretty poor job in that regard.

[thaicurious]

20 hours ago, pedro01 said:

Homosexual sex is not what nature intended. Sex is for reproduction. So it's actually quite fair to say that homosexuality is not natures design.

 

Not that it matters, nor should anyone get upset about it. Nature didn't make us for hang-gliding either. 

 

But homosexuality is not natural. It's against evolutionary design. Evolutions purpose is to perpetuate the species. Homosexuality does a pretty poor job in that regard.

Not what nature intended, huh? Do you also speak for God?

 

"Evolutionary design"? Really? Oh, you must mean Christian fundamentalist, pseudoscientific, so-called "intelligent design", perhaps?

 

Let's google some of the latest actual scientific research just for grins.

 

The following random google result from...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Science_%26_the_Public

Here's who they are:

"Society for Science & the Public (SSP), formerly known as Science Service, is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of science, through its science education programs and publications"

 

article dated OCTOBER 20, 2018

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/genetics-dna-homosexuality-gay-orientation-attractiveness-straight

"DNA differences are linked to having same-sex sexual partners"

(ooops, so much for your "theory" of "evolutionary design")

 

"...Andrea Ganna, a geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard reported the results October 19 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Human Genetics...."

 

"Collectively, the DNA differences explained only 8 to 12 percent of the heritability of having same-sex partners. “There is no gay gene,” Ganna said, “but rather non-heterosexuality is influenced by many tiny-effect genetic factors.”

 

"...This is the first DNA difference ever linked to female sexual orientation, says Lisa Diamond, a psychologist at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City who studies the nature and development of same-sex sexuality. The results are consistent with previous studies suggesting genetics may play a bigger role in influencing male sexuality than female sexuality...."

 

"...the study’s size is its main advantage, Bailey says. “It’s huge. Huge.”

Researchers examined DNA data from more than 400,000 participants"

 

"...he findings were replicated with data from three other studies..."

 

"...The results are consistent with previous studies suggesting genetics may play a bigger role in influencing male sexuality than female sexuality...."

 

"For humans, male sexuality may be more tightly linked (than female sexuality) to genes..."

 

"...Same-sex sexuality appears to be genetically influenced..."

 

But just so you shouldn't worry about your own self going gay....

 

"...a variant on chromosome 15 linked to men having sex with men is also associated with male pattern baldness..."

 

 

have a Diesel day

Edited February 20, 2019 by thaicurious

[pedro01]

6 hours ago, thaicurious said:

Not what nature intended, huh? Do you also speak for God?

 

"Evolutionary design"? Really? Oh, you must mean Christian fundamentalist, pseudoscientific, so-called "intelligent design", perhaps?

 

Let's google some of the latest actual scientific research just for grins.

 

The following random google result from...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Science_%26_the_Public

Here's who they are:

"Society for Science & the Public (SSP), formerly known as Science Service, is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion of science, through its science education programs and publications"

 

article dated OCTOBER 20, 2018

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/genetics-dna-homosexuality-gay-orientation-attractiveness-straight

"DNA differences are linked to having same-sex sexual partners"

(ooops, so much for your "theory" of "evolutionary design")

 

"...Andrea Ganna, a geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard reported the results October 19 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Human Genetics...."

 

"Collectively, the DNA differences explained only 8 to 12 percent of the heritability of having same-sex partners. “There is no gay gene,” Ganna said, “but rather non-heterosexuality is influenced by many tiny-effect genetic factors.”

 

"...This is the first DNA difference ever linked to female sexual orientation, says Lisa Diamond, a psychologist at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City who studies the nature and development of same-sex sexuality. The results are consistent with previous studies suggesting genetics may play a bigger role in influencing male sexuality than female sexuality...."

 

"...the study’s size is its main advantage, Bailey says. “It’s huge. Huge.”

Researchers examined DNA data from more than 400,000 participants"

 

"...he findings were replicated with data from three other studies..."

 

"...The results are consistent with previous studies suggesting genetics may play a bigger role in influencing male sexuality than female sexuality...."

 

"For humans, male sexuality may be more tightly linked (than female sexuality) to genes..."

 

"...Same-sex sexuality appears to be genetically influenced..."

 

But just so you shouldn't worry about your own self going gay....

 

"...a variant on chromosome 15 linked to men having sex with men is also associated with male pattern baldness..."

 

 

have a Diesel day

 

I can't speak for God as I do not believe he exists. Quite hilarious you'd go for the Anti-Christian fundamentalist argument with someone discussing evolution.

 

I can speak for Darwin as I believe his theories on evolution as a means to perpetuate the species. 

 

Homosexuals are the end of the line. They cannot reproduce. They are therefore counter to evolutionary goals. 

 

As per your cut and paste job above - homosexuality would therefore be a genetic abnormality - a failed evolutionary pathway. 

[RJRS1301]

On 5/2/2018 at 12:44 PM, Peterw42 said:

Not sure how the "straighter than straight" guys can come to terms with the fact that they have , at some time in Thailand, found a lady-boy sexually attractive, and not even been aware of it.

At some point, gay or not, we have all looked at, desired sexually, been attracted to a beautiful sexy woman who is in fact a man.

 

No not ALl of “us”

 

[thaicurious]

1 hour ago, pedro01 said:

 

I can't speak for God as I do not believe he exists. Quite hilarious you'd go for the Anti-Christian fundamentalist argument with someone discussing evolution.

 

I can speak for Darwin as I believe his theories on evolution as a means to perpetuate the species. 

 

Homosexuals are the end of the line. They cannot reproduce. They are therefore counter to evolutionary goals. 

 

As per your cut and paste job above - homosexuality would therefore be a genetic abnormality - a failed evolutionary pathway. 

You think you are discussing evolution? Speaking of things hilarious. No, that's not what you are doing. You are only deluding yourself. The reality is that you are doing nothing but some simplist thinking & espousing fundamentalism regardless of whether or not you are Christian. Saying the word Darwin doesn't mean you know a thing about evolution. Saying the word evolution doesn't mean you know a thing about genetics. Saying that being gay is a "failed evolutionary pathway" because, what, Mr Darwin Evolution decided to give that a try, is, well, hilarious.

 

Feel free to have a last word. I won't see it. I'm clicking you onto ignore. Buh bye.

[pedro01]

21 hours ago, thaicurious said:

You think you are discussing evolution? Speaking of things hilarious. No, that's not what you are doing. You are only deluding yourself. The reality is that you are doing nothing but some simplist thinking & espousing fundamentalism regardless of whether or not you are Christian. Saying the word Darwin doesn't mean you know a thing about evolution. Saying the word evolution doesn't mean you know a thing about genetics. Saying that being gay is a "failed evolutionary pathway" because, what, Mr Darwin Evolution decided to give that a try, is, well, hilarious.

 

Feel free to have a last word. I won't see it. I'm clicking you onto ignore. Buh bye.

 

For your DNA to survive and to participate in evolution, you need to reproduce. 

 

You must've been away the day they did that at school, I guess.

[onthemoon]

24 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

 

For your DNA to survive and to participate in evolution, you need to reproduce. 

 

You must've been away the day they did that at school, I guess.

Right. That's why gay people are extinct now.

[ivor bigun]

Right. That's why gay people are extinct now.

Nope its just straight people have sex and produce gay ones ,who then have sex and produce nothing

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jingthing]

10 minutes ago, ivor bigun said:

Nope its just straight people have sex and produce gay ones ,who then have sex and produce nothing

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I didn't get the memo that the earth is suffering from a shortage of human beings. So some people, straight/gay/whatever don't reproduce. That's a problem? Sounds like a FEATURE to me. 

[ivor bigun]

I didn't get the memo that the earth is suffering from a shortage of human beings. So some people, straight/gay/whatever don't reproduce. That's a problem? Sounds like a FEATURE to me. 

Well lets hope one faith starting with m not mormons turns gay overnight lol

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, ivor bigun said:

Well lets hope one faith starting with m not mormons turns gay overnight lol

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I wouldn't go there but that magic underwear the men wear is enough to put anyone off sex.

[onthemoon]

1 hour ago, ivor bigun said:

Nope its just straight people have sex and produce gay ones ,who then have sex and produce nothing

I see. Sex is only for reproduction. Shame on all the straight couples that don't have children. Maybe they use contraceptives. Should be outlawed, really.

[thaicurious]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I wouldn't go there but that magic underwear the men wear is enough to put anyone off sex.

Magic underwear? Oh that so funny. I'd never heard the term before so of course I had to google. Nothing like what I was imagining.

 

This is heterowear?

 

 

Oh that's so sad, so funny, so pathetic. But at least not worn in public by Mormons, as do moronic homophobes make fools of themselves on the internet where in front of God's eyes and everyone's they try to pass off their keyboard gay bashing as "theorizing" "science", their bigotry as "political discussion", their ignorant alternate facts as "debate". It's not even interesting.

[pedro01]

3 hours ago, onthemoon said:

Right. That's why gay people are extinct now.

Nope - you miss the point.

 

Gay sex was called 'unnatural' and it seems some get upset about that nomenclature. 

 

I just pointed out that sex occurs naturally as a means of procreation. Procreation exists to perpetuate the species. By evolutionary design - sex is quite enjoyable. It is enjoyable not as a 'gift' from some omnipotent being - but because by making it enjoyable, animals and humans reproduce more.

 

So it's fair to say that gay sex is not fulfilling the intention of nature/evolution to procreate.

 

But before you get bent out of shape. Driving a car isn't natural either. Plenty of things aren't... like ice cream...

[pedro01]

1 hour ago, onthemoon said:

I see. Sex is only for reproduction. Shame on all the straight couples that don't have children. Maybe they use contraceptives. Should be outlawed, really.

 

Nobody said that.

 

Nature/evolution created sex as a means of reproduction.

 

Does not mean anyone is saying you shouldn't do anything. People really are too sensitive.

[pedro01]

55 minutes ago, thaicurious said:

Magic underwear? Oh that so funny. I'd never heard the term before so of course I had to google. Nothing like what I was imagining.

 

This is heterowear?

 

 

Oh that's so sad, so funny, so pathetic. But at least not worn in public by Mormons, as do moronic homophobes make fools of themselves on the internet where in front of God's eyes and everyone's they try to pass off their keyboard gay bashing as "theorizing" "science", their bigotry as "political discussion", their ignorant alternate facts as "debate". It's not even interesting.

 

Well - they say you learn something every day and in my 48 years, I'd never actually seen the mormon magic underpants.

 

But - on your point - not everyone that discusses sexuality is a homophobe or gay bashing. 

[onthemoon]

2 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

Nope - you miss the point.

 

Gay sex was called 'unnatural' and it seems some get upset about that nomenclature. 

 

I just pointed out that sex occurs naturally as a means of procreation. Procreation exists to perpetuate the species. By evolutionary design - sex is quite enjoyable. It is enjoyable not as a 'gift' from some omnipotent being - but because by making it enjoyable, animals and humans reproduce more.

 

So it's fair to say that gay sex is not fulfilling the intention of nature/evolution to procreate.

 

But before you get bent out of shape. Driving a car isn't natural either. Plenty of things aren't... like ice cream...

Driving a car is not natural, because that is not an activity produced by nature. Being gay is natural, because nature (or any god you may believe in) made people gay.

 

Gay people are privileged. We don't have to procreate, we can enjoy life without that obligation. That makes us the peak of the evolution, pure bliss. It is fair to say that we have reached the final goal of evolution.

 

Remark: This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it makes as much sense as your "intention of evolution is procreation" argument. Go ahead, procreate, I have no objections. But please leave gay people, straight people who decide not to have children, and straight people who want to have children but cannot for medical reasons, alone with your theories. Thanks.

[wombat]

all this religious stuff from supposedly intelligent people scares me.

[tlandtday]

Sounds like they guys boning ladyboys saying they are straight lol.

[ivor bigun]

Driving a car is not natural, because that is not an activity produced by nature. Being gay is natural, because nature (or any god you may believe in) made people gay.
 
Gay people are privileged. We don't have to procreate, we can enjoy life without that obligation. That makes us the peak of the evolution, pure bliss. It is fair to say that we have reached the final goal of evolution.
 
Remark: This is a bit tongue in cheek, but it makes as much sense as your "intention of evolution is procreation" argument. Go ahead, procreate, I have no objections. But please leave gay people, straight people who decide not to have children, and straight people who want to have children but cannot for medical reasons, alone with your theories. Thanks.

He also made them want to have sex with children,or kill other people,is that natural as well?
And before you call me homophobe,i have no problem whatsoever what two men do in private ,

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[batata]

On 5/1/2018 at 3:06 PM, Jingthing said:

Most of the adult gay men that I have known have at times in their lives had sex with females including long term affairs, and even marriage. I'm talking about men that identify as gay and not bi.

 

Lesbians even more so.

 

So some of these men that currently identify as straight may indeed not be straight in the long run and some of them will.

 

Does it really matter? 

 

People should follow their bliss (but play safe please). 

couldn't say it better, many "straight" man married for long period of time, for whatever reason, mainly by lack of sex with their partner, they got curious and start to consider other alternatives, maybe hard to deal with their feelings in the beginning but curiosity killed the cat, they realized that after all they were not as straight as they thought...nothing wrong with swing both ways, whatever fits one's bliss....medical studies do confirm there no 100% heterosexual people, it appears all of us (man and women) have some homosexual tendencies/fantasies hidden in ourselves, some they act on them and some don't

[ivor bigun]

I dont know about "studies" that say no one is 100% straight and that at sometime in our lives we have fancied someone of the same sex ,well its bullshit, i have never ever fancied a man( i can understand if a guy is good looking,) but not in my wildest dreams have i ever wanted to do anything sexual with either a man ,a ladyboy or a goat. So you can go on and on dreaming that all men have at some time fancied another man.

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[PingRoundTheWorld]

And this is how HIV actually spreads to "straight" males, and potentially to women from them. If you have sex with men (or ladyboys) then you're not straight - you're bi or gay. Nothing wrong with that, but telling women you are straight while secretly receiving anal sex on a regular basis is putting them at risk because YOU are at greater risk.

[Jingthing]

And this is how HIV actually spreads to "straight" males, and potentially to women from them. If you have sex with men (or ladyboys) then you're not straight - you're bi or gay. Nothing wrong with that, but telling women you are straight while secretly receiving anal sex on a regular basis is putting them at risk because YOU are at greater risk.

You make a lot of silly assumptions about specific sex acts. Having sex with males doesn't definitively mean you're gay any more than having sex with females definitively means you're straight.

 

Of course if you're straight there is nothing wrong with that.

 

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app