From: fork-admin@xent.com  Mon Sep  9 19:27:27 2002
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.example.com
Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13B7316F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon,  9 Sep 2002 19:27:26 +0100 (IST)
Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 09 Sep 2002 19:27:26 +0100 (IST)
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g89DuPC17836 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Mon, 9 Sep 2002 14:56:27 +0100
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id EB2FD2940A5; Mon,  9 Sep 2002 06:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: fork@example.com
Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88])
    by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9296229409C for <fork@xent.com>;
    Mon,  9 Sep 2002 06:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from h00e098788e1f.ne.client2.attbi.com ([24.61.143.15]) by
    rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626)
    with ESMTP id
    <20020909135531.IXCR14182.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@h00e098788e1f.ne.client2.attbi.com>;
    Mon, 9 Sep 2002 13:55:31 +0000
From: bitbitch@magnesium.net
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.52f) Educational
Reply-To: bitbitch@magnesium.net
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-Id: <19271172739.20020909095555@magnesium.net>
To: eugen Leitl <eugen@leitl.org>
Cc: fork@example.com
Subject: Re[3]: Selling Wedded Bliss (was Re: Ouch...)
In-Reply-To: <10770315074.20020909094137@magnesium.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0209091305070.32400-100000@hydrogen.leitl.org>
    <10770315074.20020909094137@magnesium.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
X-Beenthere: fork@example.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:fork@example.com>
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
    <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:55:55 -0400
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-12.9 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,
	      NO_REAL_NAME,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,
	      SIGNATURE_SHORT_DENSE,SPAM_PHRASE_01_02,SUPERLONG_LINE,
	      USER_AGENT_THEBAT
	version=2.50-cvs
X-Spam-Level: 

In addition, one bit of anecdotal evidence from a conversation in
1984! in San Fransisco is hardly enough to extrapolate 500 to 3k.

This is the only quote I could find relating to promiscuity in
homosexual men.

"I think people feel a certain invulnerability, especially young
people, like this disease doesn't affect me. The publicity about the disease was very much the kind where it was easy to say, "That isn't me. I'm not promiscuous." Promiscuity, especially, was a piece where people could easily say, "Well, I'm not. Promiscuous is more than I do." If you have 300 partners a year, you can think you're not promiscuous if you know somebody who has 500. So it's all relative, and it was easy to feel that that isn't me."

You could find hets who have the same kind of partner volume.  BFD.
This kind of random generation of numbers that leads the nutty
religious bigots (as you mentioned earlier).

Grr.   Bits damnit.  Now, I must go brief.

-BB


EL>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, CDale wrote:

>>> I agree w/ ya Tom.  That kind of thinking is SO idiotic.  Sure, gays

EL>> So how many of your hetero friends had >3 k lovers?

bmn> So Eugen, how many of your homo friends have -had- 3k lovers?

bmn> In fact, thats a general question for FoRK proper.

bmn> Do you know anyone, outside of meybee Wilt Chamberlin and a few of the
bmn> gang-bang porn queens who -have- had even 1.5k lovers?

bmn> Eegads, if you're hypothesizing numbers like -that- Eugen, you at
bmn> least owe it to FoRK to back that shit up.

bmn> Otherwise we're liable to assume rampant unfounded homophobia and that
bmn> would just be a lose.

bmn> Just a quick assumption here.   I'm not a math geek or anything, but
bmn> assuming 1 lover every day, that would be like at least one lover
bmn> everyday for 8 years and some change.   I don't know about you, but
bmn> very very few of us are -that- lucky (or even close to that lucky)
bmn> and after awhile, even the sexaholics get bored and have to mingle
bmn> something new into their weekends.   You really are assumiing that the
bmn> homosexual population is a) that large in a given area (The meccas
bmn> might qualify, but try finding that kind of homosexual population in
bmn> say, Tulsa, Oklahoma or Manchester, NH (Tho Manchester does have quite
bmn> a few nifty gaybars, but thats a different story)  b) that bored/sex
bmn> obsessed/recreationally free to pursue sex that often, with that many
bmn> partners or that they'd even WANT that many partners.

bmn> Qualify yourself, or at least lower your outrageous numbers.

bmn> =BB
>>> are promiscuous, and so are hets, but I betcha gays are more
>>> AIDSphobic than hets, generally speaking....

EL>> The virus load issue is orthogonal to the fact. Bzzt. Switch on your
EL>> brain, you both. I was mentioning that a subpopulation outside of the sex
EL>> industry is/used to be extremely promiscuous, about two orders of
EL>> magnitude higher than average.









-- 
Best regards,
 bitbitch                            mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net


