The dude who posted the article has a math degree from Harvard. You have made wrong conclusions about the data now, on three separate occasions without even reading it.
Harvard vs Wil. Wonder who to go with?

Here is the logic Wil is using. Earlier in the thread, when he posted that 28% of gay men have over 1000 partners he was being truthful. Now, when he is asked for more proof it would be harmful to the gay community to post that proof he definitely has. It's laughable at face value. It's embarrassing to anybody with any critical thinking skills.

No? I don't think anyone is conducting LGBTQ+ polls in South Sudan.

I mean, if you wanna go meta with this. I'm assuming you have a problem with the religion of islam. Just a wild guess. How much sex do you think the blokes in Iran are having?

The source is fantastic? Great! What is it???

No, you're a bigot and exactly the type of people that they are talking about when they say they wouldn't want people to know.

As I've said, you are the problem, not me. I couldn't care less how much sex people have because I'm not judgemental

Why not keep your odious canuck pie-hole shut, luser !!!1! Other than that, and as always reminding Odi Award winner wil318466 to never forget what that "deafening silence" really means, I'd like to point out that, even at the height of this lolwil pederasty-palooza...

Nobody is being "shouted down".

You are dumb. You're just a dumb human being.

Didn't get an answer to this.

And here it is yet again - the wil fallback position when he can't address the actual points made.

Only if you have the mistaken idea that Wilworld involves consistency. It doesn't. It involves defending whatever Wil is thinking only at that given moment.

Remember, he's saying he used a study to show how outlandish data mining can be whilst also agreeing entirely with that study. Consistency isn't the aim. Defending his ad hoc reckons is the aim.

It's just something Milo says. Like he says he was born in Greece, when his birth certificate was actually issued in Kent, and he says his name's Yiannopoulos, and previously said it was Wagner, when it's actually Hanrahan (his father's original name was supposedly Yiannopoulos, but it was changed before Milo was born), and he says he's Jewish, when in fact he was brought up as a Catholic and, while his maternal grandmother may have been Jewish, his mother isn't, which breaks the chain.

Just so it's still clear, wil says paedophilia rocks and is totally OK because the kids are asking for it.

So what do you guys make of this study?

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...lly_active_men

According to this study the older homosexual active men, who where interviewed had on average 251 lifetime sexual partners. Given that parts of the sample live in rural areas, I imagine these numbers might be higher in people living in a more urban setting (e.g. a big US city). Besides, you can add the easier availability of sex nowadays (the study is from 1997 after all), increasingly sexualized advertising, the rise of apps like Grindr, and the increased acceptance of homosexuality in society, which results in more events like gay partys, gay nightclubs.

Wil´s estimation therefore may not be as bad as you guys suggest.

If you want a truly ridiculous and flat out wrong suggestion, look at the estimation of former UKIP politician Lord Christopher Monckton
(even Nigel Farage distanced himself from his homophobic comments)

Hal, I read the entire thing! It doesn't come close to saying what Wil says is true. It even says the same amount of people report having under 2 partners as over 500.
It's a good data source on older gay men, which is kind of sad and scary that the older population seems to get tested much less for HIV while engaging in the riskier behaviour.

You might note that I said several times ITT there was a lot more risky behaviour among the older generation, before HIV was discovered and that those who have survived from that era are definitely more promiscuous.

Wil believes in the gayopocalpse. Lol.

One easy way to reduce suicides in homosexuals is to allow same-sex marriage:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahael.../#360e18757586

or if you prefer CNN as a source:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/22/he...ge-study-trnd/

Hahaha. You should start a tumblr for this ****.

Reasonable Guardian report on Milo's 'career' here.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...uy-hate-speech

I agree with you.

But I think Wil got the general idea right (= homosexuals are far more promiscuous), and just used a poor choice of words by utilizing words like "astronomical".

I have a much newer study from 2010 from Germany (it was funded by the German health ministry):
http://www.emis-project.eu/sites/def...rt_germany.pdf

One of the results was that the interviewed homosexuals reported having 3 sex partners on average within the 12-month period leading up to the interview in addition to being in a relationship.

I don´t think that is a bad thing at all, before someone tries to paint me as homophobe. I just think that in homosexual relationships having some side-action is far more accepted (and I could quote other reliable research from the University of Zürich and other sources in order to back up my claim) than in heterosexual relationships.

Some of you probably have a girlfriend or wife. Now imagine if you would have had 3 sexual partners in addition to being in a relationship in the last year... and then try to imagine her reaction
You will probably end up getting stabbed in your sleep if you´ve got one of these crazy ones or might just end up getting kicked out of your house/apartment and paying for a divorce if you are lucky

If you take this higher acceptance of "side-action" and combine it with the argument of juan valdez, you can easily see, why homosexuals end up having more sexual partners.

Wil has a history of misogyny, racism and homophobia though. He argues from ignorance. Your assertions/posting is fine, because they don't come from a place of hate or ignorance.

My basic point has been: The homosexual community was sexual reckless before the 80s, then HIV was discovered and things have normalized since then. The radical christian site's numbers weren't even wrong! They were "normal" for 1970s SF.

My guess is that confident, attractive, promiscuous gay guys are going to find it somewhat easier (though not 'astronomically' lol) to get laid than their hetero equivalents, while at the other end of the scale introverts will struggle just as badly or perhaps even more so than their hetero equivalents due to the weight of numbers being against them.

So I think the graphs' shapes are probably somewhat different, making comparisons of raw averages pretty meaningless (though wil's figure of 28% of gay men having 1000 partners is just laughable).

One could even argue that guys like Bladesman87 attack Wil for his semantics, because they are fighting a losing battle on the ground of convincing arguments.

Wil probably isn´t going to die on that hill this time
(I had to smile at your Edge of tomorrow reference @aoFrantic )



Look up my recent posts in the LGBTQ thread and the amount of <removed> tags by chezlaw
You may think my posting is fine, but chezlaw had a deviating opinion (I admit to making a very controversial post in this thread though).

I don´t disagree with your basic point and have already known your position by reading your posts in this thread. But don´t you think that variables like:
-the rise of apps like Grindr, which enable easy hook-ups
-increasingly sexualized advertising
-increased acceptance of homosexuality
-specific gay nightclubs (unthinkable 100 years ago)
-gay parties
-the outing of gay celebrities (billionaire Peter Thiel comes to my mind)
...

and so on have increased the amount of sexual encounters homosexual people have by a magnitude? In addition to the other arguments by juan valdez and my argument of homosexuals having way more "side-action" than heterosexual people in relationships.

It's a tremendous source! Believe me, it's fantastic. Just a tremendous, tremendous source.

Both of you are prime examples of ignorance and stupidity. You do NOT know what you are talking about when it comes to this subject, you just don't. You don't know much about (if anything) the gay community and you obviously haven't talked to enough of them to get a good idea of what their experiences are like. This is blatantly obvious by the way you speak. Your examples of an "introverted male", regardless of orientation, are absurd. Of course it doesn't matter if you are gay or straight and a dork, you aren't getting laid regardless. I've explained it very easily - when females are taken out of the equation, the rate will go up because in general, straight or gay males want sex more often.

Your arguments are so awfully bad reading them make my head hurt. Go out and talk to gay males, go read gay websites. They have actual opinions about it, they discuss it. Go read it and educate yourself and stop making yourself look like fools.

This isn't an argument. I know, without a doubt, 100%, that I'm right.

You have the link. Why didn't you post it in the thread so people could read it?

Hint : because you know it proves me correct. I've now asked you multiple times to quote my posts where you made claims against me and I asked you multiple times to share the link with the rest of the forum so they can go decide themselves. You constantly refuse to do either. It's literally a cut/paste. Why won't you do it?

Tiny, angry, sexually inexperienced wil believes that all men are BSing blabbermouths, based on knowledge of a sample of one.