It has "Top Secret" stamped on it. It's going to stay that way. I don't even need to link it, I proved aoFrantic is a straight up liar.

The rest of you can believe whatever you wish. A quick google search and a few ventures into gay websites will give you all the truth you need. Believe it or don't, I simply don't care.

The number is from the radical christian site Wil posted. The post was deleted for being homophobic, but it stated that 83% of the gay males surveyed had 50+ partners and 28% had over 1,000. He is now attempting to gaslight on this issue.
Wil's issue is that the survey was conducted in 1978, in San Fransisco, among outed and socially active gay men. He then took this to be representative of the worldwide LGBT population in 2017. Now, anyone with even basic intelligence could see the problem here. Not Wil though.

This is why smear campaigns are so successful. Throw enough dirt at somebody and something will stick.

Congratulations on your decisive (hallucinated) victory

I will add that every dating site, from Tinder to OKC to I'd assume grindr, is full of bots. The lesser sites like Ashley Madison or that Trump dating site were like ~95% bots, with the larger sites still having a large amount of inactive or not legitimate users.

I have never used Grindr, but it seems like it is really popular from what I've read. Also,

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-social-lives

Gay men's lives have changed for the better, and Grindr is part of that

Read up on your queer history and you understand that, in fact, these apps can be a godsend for those have experienced violence and those of us who grew up in areas without any LGB resources. They have provided us with a means of connecting with each other that simply never existed before.

The study also found that the midwest and the south, in particular, have experienced a rapid increase in same-sex behavior. It suggests that one possible reason for this is the emergence of sexual and social networking sites, or “the apps” as we would call them.

“In other words, while those in the East and West may have long had access to potential sexual partners via urban centers with strong LGB communities and venues, those in the South and Midwest may have benefited more from the emergence of sexual networking technologies in terms of access to potential partners,” the paper said.

So, when I said "communication" is much better now, I was right. Good for them.

Wil researched "gay men lifetime partners" to try to discredit my argument that they're more or less in line with the general population.
He came across the first google result, which is a radical christian website. They cite a 1978 survey, which isn't even completely wrong. But, they use that survey to falsely attack the entire LGBT population and the many perceived sins of it according to their christian faith. Chezlaw then removed the post because everybody complained about the homophobia attached to the site.

Nothing to worry about here

Jokes apart, thank you for bringing this up, I didn´t think of the amount of bots. Still the user numbers should be a lot higher than 2OutsNoProb suggested.

Everything about you is a lie, dude. This was my actual response:

When I said "How about I respond with this?", what exactly did you think those words meant? I was PURPOSEFULLY putting out bad data. I never ONCE made that 28% claim.

EVERY SINGLE THING YOU SAY IS A LIE. And on top of it, you go to ATF and complain to Mat about it to try to get me banned?

How dishonest and scummy of a human being can you truly be? If you want to ask Mat to ban me, then GO ****ING ASKING HIM. Don't go running around trying to put words in my mouth about claims I NEVER made, you jerkoff.

I'd also like to add that grindr is used in 192 countries worldwide, so for Wil to falsely assume that all 5 million users were active USA residents was highly disingenuous as well. Even if we assumed that 100% of those 5 million users were monthly active users and none were bots/inactive accounts, it would be unlikely even half of them were from the USA.

Wil, if you were "purposefully" putting out bad data, why have you spent all day defending the premise that a large amount of gay males have 1,000+ partners in their lifetime? If it's bad data, why do you agree with it?

You are actually correct here, I didn't realize it was world-wide. The correct number is 2.6 million, so we can effectively cut my previous numbers in half. So instead of ~30%, we can call it ~15%.


Again, I NEVER SAID THIS. I NEVER, NOT ONCE, put out a % on anything, I simply said some were very active. I even purposefully used careful language. I never said all, I never said most, I never gave a %.

How many times will we go over the same stupid arguments?

There's nothing hallucinated about it. aoFrantic straight up lied. I offered him 20-1 that I could prove he was lying, he declined. He edited out his posts to make something appear what it was not.

But, that's your boy. You handle him.

Then, can you categorically say that you do not believe a large percentage of gay males have over 1000 lifetime partners? Can you commit those words to a post?
Can you answer my questions I asked you now four times about what you believe the average number of partners to be for an average straight and LGBT person?

And that is only the estimated userbase of Grindr. There are plenty of other dating apps for homosexuals and also many dating apps cater to all sexual orientations. Even on Tinder (which has the most users) you can look for same-sex relationships.

Hello, I am a new mod in this forum. Chezlaw and I have discussed this thread and have made the following decision.

The discussion of the number of sexual partners gay men have in this thread will not be allowed to continue.

This topic originally arose in the thread to some degree to explain/condone pederasty. Additionally, historically emphasizing real or perceived differences between groups has been a successful tactic used to discriminate, minimize, marginalize, and fuel hatred toward a minority group.

In particular, the sexual proclivities (real or perceived) of gay men has been used to discriminate, minimize, marginalize, and fuel hatred toward gay men for far too long.

Posts on this topic will no longer be allowed in this thread. I realize that this is awkward and will feel like we are stopping a conversation right in the middle, but everybody has had their chance to express their feelings on the topic. Truthfully, the discussion went on way too long and we are belatedly stepping in.

Any further post on this topic in this thread will be deleted. If anybody wants to discuss this decision, feel free to post in the !!! Moderation thread.

Only half of the 5 million users he cited are in the US.

The number of gay males + bi males + experimenting MSM is probably higher than 9-15 million in the US.

Ergo, the percentage of males willing to engage in sex with other males who are on Grindr might not be infinitesimal, but nor is it high.

You guys, who clearly know that you're wrong but already have all your chips in the center of the table and are going to the grave with your hand, are also not explaining why you feel there's an automatic link between people being on Grindr and their wanting to **** new partners every five days. Why do you automatically assume extreme sexual promiscuity on the part of many gay males? Who says John Q. Homosexual, who uses Grindr or the Craigslist "casual encounters" section, doesn't do so only 5x a year?

EDIT: I hit send about three seconds after the new mod posted what he did.

Are you a child? I'm not saying that, I don't know if it's true, and I have no idea why you want ME to say something YOU believe.

I never, not once, put a number out there or a percentage. Everyone in this thread knows that is true. I know I never did that because it's impossible for me to actually know it. I made my claims, and that was it. My claims are correct, which is why you ran around editing your posts and lying about things because once you started reading, you know, actual responses by real people, you realized I was indeed correct.

You're wrong, dude. You spent the last 2 days arguing with me over idiocy I never said, and then when I gave you a chance to win a thousand dollars on it at 20-1, you declined because we both know you lied. I have the evidence in front of me, we aren't arguing if I'm right, I already know I'm right.

Ok guys, so let´s get back to some discussion of Milo and the Milo incident

And good luck to you whosnext!

Question: Will you be trying to delete or edit out any more posts by Wil that will lead to gaslighting?
Why can't this thread be merged with the current LGBT thread?
Why is this discussion supposed to stop, but 9/11 trutherism and thoughts expressing joy of assassinations not?

Well, I'm glad I won before the discussion ended. Another win for Willy.

.

Milo is done. In my opinion his career is over.

Ok, let me play Devil´s advocate here:
1. Bad publicity is also publicity
2. He can easily self publish his book and earn a ton of money
3. He still has his youtube channel and a large, loyal audience

I´m not a Milo fanboy btw, but I think one can learn a ton about rhetoric simply by watching
his videos or reading his articles.

Smarter people would say that the word "astronomical" has a meaning and it usually refers to incomprehensibly large numbers, and then they would note that I haven't so much as attempted to force these words into Wil's mouth. I've recommended that people push Wil himself to define and defend such terms. I'm not a Lolwil to English translator so any time he wants to explain himself and have some kind of consistent argument, he's welcome.

Some people might also note one of your accounts got banned for attempting to argue that homosexuality is a mental illness. That's something you could easily solve for yourself with a little bit of psych research and find out the answer is that you're an ignorant pos.

He was labeled as a pedo. Of all the accusations he could have been labelled as, that may be the worst one.

He's untouchable at this point. No one will book him. I don't know if he can get published through normal means, but I have no idea about that. I'm sure Bill Maher will mention him next weekend (because he was just on his show, and it may have been a driver to release this info because Maher's show carries weight)

I don't see how Milo can not just disappear at this point. His drivers of fame were his college talks and his appearances on TV (linked to Youtube). TV won't touch him and I'm SURE colleges won't book him anymore. He wasn't big enough to carry book sales on his own, he needed fame to drive those book sales, and while he was indeed rising in fame, that candle has been blown out.

I just can't see how he'll recover from this. I honestly think he's toast.