Announcement

Collapse

Health Science 101 Guidelines

Greetings! Welcome to Health Science.

Here's where we talk about the latest fad diets, the advantages of vegetarianism, the joy of exercise and good health. Like everywhere else at Tweb our decorum rules apply.

This is a place to exchange ideas and network with other health conscience folks, this isn't a forum for heated debate.
See more
See less

Survey finds excess health problems in lesbians, gays, bisexuals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Ya lost me on that one.
    Starlight said "being a minority in and of itself, must have a very very small effect on health, if it even has one at all." In response, you said "Yet the social scientists bend over backward to make that the primary problem." The social scientists in the study did not say being a minority in and of itself is the primary problem.

    WOW... that was a BRILLIANT statement! I suspect you did what I did - a quick Google to see how bad the situation really is. I found a number of places where gays propose that successful marriage involves an "open marriage", and they recommend that hetero marriages would work better if we did likewise.

    The reason you don't think the percentage really matters is that it doesn't benefit your perverse worldview.
    Your blatant well-poisoning aside, you apparently didn't read or understand my argument at all. Virtually everyone, regardless of religious/political belief, agrees that robbery and murder are inherently harmful. Why? Because those actions inseparably involve an observable harm. There is never even ONE instance in which murder does not involve harm--if there was, then murder by definition wouldn't be inherently harmful. But there ARE instances in which same-sex behavior does not involve any observable harm. Ergo, same-sex behavior does not seem to be inherently harmful, even if many instances of it are.

    What kind of sick planet did you come from?
    Earth.

    The fact remains, fm, much as you would like to ignore it, that OVERALL, homosexual sex, particularly male/male, has significantly more risk factors than heterosexual sex.
    I have NEVER ignored or denied that male/male homosexual sex can have significantly more risk factors than heterosexual sex. And I disapprove of the instances in which gay men have homosexual sex in the face of those risks.

    Look up "the dirty little secret in 'monogamous' homosexual marriages."

    Here's a sample....

    They call them "San Francisco relationships."

    A term coined by the local gay community, it's defined as two men in a long-term open relationship, with lovers on the side.

    A new study released this week by the Center for Research on Gender & Sexuality at San Francisco State University put statistics around what gay men already know: Many Bay Area boyfriends negotiate open relationships that allow for sex with outsiders.

    After studying the sexual patterns of 566 gay male couples from the Bay Area for three years, lead researcher Colleen Hoff found that gay men negotiate ground rules and open their relationships as a way to build trust and longevity in their partnerships.

    "I think it's quite natural for men to want to continue to have an active and varied sex life," said 50-year-old technology consultant Dean Allemang from Oakland, who just ended a 13-year-open relationship and has begun another with a new boyfriend.

    "I don't own my lover, and I don't own his body," he said. "I think it's weird to ask someone you love to give up that part of their life. I would never do it."
    Note what the article says:

    In her study of gay couples, 47 percent reported open relationships. Forty-five percent were monogamous, and the remaining 8 percent disagreed about what they were.


    As you can see, those open relationships are not counted as monogamous relationships. In fact, there are about as many monogamous relationships as there are open relationships. Sure, I'd say there are too many open relationships and not enough monogamous ones, but monogamy doesn't seem to be nearly as rare among the LGBT community as you depict it to be.
    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by fm93 View Post
      Note what the article says:

      [box]A term coined by the local gay community, it's defined as two men in a long-term open relationship, with lovers on the side.
      That's not about love - it's about lust.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        Yet the social scientists bend over backward to make that the primary problem.
        No, no, you're confusing two things.

        There's:
        A) Being a member of a minority group. eg having black skin in a mostly white country, being a Muslim in a mostly Christian country, being gay etc.
        and, different to that, there's:
        B) Being the member of a minority group that is regularly discriminated against, that experiences prejudice, stigma and condemnation from the majority of the population.

        Social scientists say (B) is bad because the social stigma and discrimination has terrible health effects. Simply being a member of a minority group is fine, as far as anyone knows, as long as that minority group is treated well by everyone else.

        Hmmmm.... if true, yet another reason not to engage in risky sexual behavior and lifestyle!
        Gay people who are virgins still report feeling stressed, depressed, anxious and suicidal due to the amounts of anti-gay prejudice and stigma and condemnation they experience. It isn't their non-existent risky sexual behavior that causes these problems.

        What percentage of the gay population do you honestly think that [are monogamous]?
        I would say around 50%. I would give a similar estimate for the non-gay population. Whether a person is the kind of person who wants to settle down with someone, or whether they are the kind of person who wants to get around, has nothing to do with which gender they are attracted to. Gay people aren't likely to be inherently any different to straight people in this regard.

        Do you have even a clue how unusual, in the gay community, it would be for your 'amended' scenario [monogamy] to occur?

        Wow you really have no clue. Do you honestly think all gay people think "I'm gay, therefore I'm heading out to some bar to pick up a different guy each night"?

        [Open relationships are] not about love - it's about lust.
        Presumably you would think that a normal man can sincerely love his wife, yet it might happen that at some point in his life he gives into temptation and has an affair. It seems like that most men simply never tell their wives they've had an affair and life goes on.

        What seems to be the case CP, is that gay men are, on the whole, more honest with their spouses than heterosexual men are. According to survey data, about the same percentage of gay men have extra-marital affairs as straight men do, but they are much more likely to tell the spouse about it.
        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
          What seems to be the case CP, is that gay men are, on the whole, more honest with their spouses than heterosexual men are.
          No, there's a concerted effort to BE more honest with their spouses because of the risk, and, apparently, the propensity to wander, establishing a "it's OK if I screw up, OK?" clause. Part of this is because of the fear of getting HIV which is a very possible outcome of straying for gay men.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            No, there's a concerted effort to BE more honest with their spouses because of the risk, and, apparently, the propensity to wander, establishing a "it's OK if I screw up, OK?" clause. Part of this is because of the fear of getting HIV which is a very possible outcome of straying for gay men.
            Maybe.

            I had assumed that the reasons gay men are more honest with their spouses than straight men are, include:
            (i) a higher level of empathy in the relationship - both are men, so they understand each other better, because "women are from mars and men are from venus"
            (ii) the fact that men are generally viewed as being on average more rational and less emotional than women so they feel okay about having a frank and rational discussion with another man on a topic (cheating and affairs) that's likely to trigger strong emotions
            (iii) because our society thinks that men are more likely to be okay with affairs than women are so they go into the discussion assuming their male spouse is more likely to be okay with it than a female spouse would have been
            (iv) because for historical reasons gay people have a reputation for a tolerance of cheating and affairs (so it's a self-perpetuating cycle of honesty to some extent).

            But, yeah, it's entirely possible that fear of STDs is also a motivating factor, and they believe their spouse needs to know so that they know to use protection in their own sex lives and get tested occasionally for STDs.
            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              That's not about love - it's about lust.
              Uh, I didn't write that. My post said:

              Note what the article says:

              In her study of gay couples, 47 percent reported open relationships. Forty-five percent were monogamous, and the remaining 8 percent disagreed about what they were.
              Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

              I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                Because current medical science doesn't have a good understanding of the details of the processes involved, nor any good idea of how to alter them.

                Maybe in the distant future we'll be able to monitor and control the brain development of babies in the womb, but it's a while away yet. Current technology seems to boil down to basic advice along the lines of "don't drink alcohol while pregnant" and "take folate tablets".
                No that's not entirely true. Medical science does have an understanding regarding specific hormonal exposure during pregnancy. I should know, I've given birth three times. For example its strongly recommended that women do not drink soy milk, go off birth control prior to conception, don't drink water with known levels of contamination. the FDA also reccomends that drugs be destroyed in coffee grounds and tossed via biohazard rather than flushed as fish have been seen with alternative or destroyed secondary sex characteristics in contaminated areas. High PCB levels and specific older pesticides are also factors which affect hormone development prenatally. I would suggest Starlight that you do your research before you throw out something like that. Also we do have technology to monitor brain development and we can see if thelled brain is functional. We can even see if needed if fetal brain waves are affected by changes in blood pressure etc. Its called Ultrasound and MRI
                A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
                George Bernard Shaw

                Comment

                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                Working...
                X