h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well perhaps the people buying the mags are the ones in relationships which are troubled, and where there is a blumming great elephant in the middle of the living room.

I've had to deal, twice, with men who wanted to work out the solution to the problem and present me with it, and a lot of very responsible guys see that as the most responsible way to go about things.

I am better at dealing with that now than I was then, but I have found myself trying to protect a partner from pain by not raising painful subjects, so I do appreciate their actions now though I didn't at the time.

Ben

Ps - Az, I think we simulposted.

<>

marriage ok is just a bit of paper , but it show respect for each other , going back on a point ,i said theres no point of getting wed if you don't love the person ,yes i agree with others when they say you don't need love ,but only because one can get wed for money eg how many times have you picked up a news paper and see a story of some girl to wed some wealthy old person ,, one more reason is to wed to stay in ones country, so yes by that i agree you don't have to wed because of love .

>>"I've had to deal, twice, with men who wanted to work out the solution to the problem and present me with it, and a lot of very responsible guys see that as the most responsible way to go about things."

I could see that approach might work where one had all the information, but I guess that doesn't happen very often in situations where emotions are involved.
If people had talked sufficiently for one of them to be able to work a solution (or even to be clear exactly what the problem really was, and *why* the problem existed), they'd *seem* to be most of the way to working out a solution between themselves, if that was possible.

Quite.

HOW exactly are there MORE ways for gay people to have sex? I mean straight people can penetrate or be penetrated, so can gay people, surely.

Interesting question - in theory it would be be possible for straight couples to have more variety of sex than gay couples, simply because of the avialibily of two models of genitalia instead of one.

However, my guess is that most gay men and lesbians are more open a greater variety of Plan Bs than than most straight men and women, Plan A being unavailable, and that there might be more habitual variety that way.

Also, the Scene tends to socialise in favour of large numbers of partners, (100s per year seem to be not uncommon for gay men in their late teens and early 20s), though that might not, in itself, favour more variety.

Ben

>>in theory it would be be possible for straight couples to have more variety of sex than gay couples, simply because of the avialibily of two models of genitalia instead of one.<<

This only applies if you close your mind off to every other sexual stimulus than penetrative sex.

I know of many gay men (and have had long spans of time myself) who refuse to engaged in anal sex and have had many and sometimes very few partners - long-term or one-night. It seems that straight couples tend to see penetrative sex as 'the only fulfilling' sexual contact. Not true. I am convinced there are those out there who may still be virgins in the conventional sense yet have had 'sex' many times.

Plus, "two models of genitalia [i.e. two penises] instead of one" does anything but restrict gay lovemaking. Particularly if both wish to engage in anal. Moreover, with lesbianism, I am sure there are many more inventive ways two women can pleasure each other without the need of a penis or penis-like instrument. I don't know myself - you'd have to ask a lesbian.

>>my guess is that most gay men and lesbians are more open a greater variety of Plan Bs than than most straight men and women, Plan A being unavailable<<

BINGO! To echo my point before, we gays have many more "Plan Bs" (I can go up to Plan O myself - geddit? ) but, and again to echo my point, why does straight sex have to be penis->vagina based so often?

>>the Scene tends to socialise in favour of large numbers of partners<<

Common misconception (stereotype? prejudice?). I would suggest that only 20-30% of gay people are so promiscuous they could hit the "100s per year ... in their late teens and early 20s" I know a guy who had sexual contact with 1000 men over the space of 3 years (around 1 per day, on average) but I know over 20 other gay men who only had promiscuous sex once or twice a week - sometimes a month.

Is the straight world so different? I am convinced Saturday nights at clubs and pubs, especially in Ibiza and 18-30 holidays, share some kind of affinity with gay culture.

I think we might agree, Chubster, but that it might not be clear because I expressed myself badly.

What I was trying to say was that if you have one set of male genitalia in a bed and one set of female genitalia, then in theory you have more options - you can perform penile/vaginal penetration for a start, not to mention both felatio and cunnilingus. It makes sense that if the couple in question have similar genitalia, then there are numerically fewer options.

However, anecdotally, it seems that having broken one socially-imposed barrier, gays and lesbians are more likely to be more relaxed about breaking other socially-imposed barriers, and experiment with variations and with what might be termed kinky or extreme sex. (I am borrowing the terms, they aren't ones I use).



I do take your point about Ibiza.



>> Common misconception (stereotype? prejudice?). I would suggest that only 20-30% of gay people are so promiscuous they could hit the "100s per year ... in their late teens and early 20s" I know a guy who had sexual contact with 1000 men over the space of 3 years (around 1 per day, on average) but I know over 20 other gay men who only had promiscuous sex once or twice a week - sometimes a month.

Misconception or stereotype I'll accept, but there are reasons why I can hardly be called prejudiced! The basis for what I said is anecdotal (the experience of friends, and friends of friends) but it is also current, (the age range I am talking about is in its early and mid 20s).

20-30% of a population is still a sizeable chunk. And a heterosexual woman who had promiscuous sex once or twice a week would not have the word 'only' applied to her activities!

I think there might be two separate things going on. It is possible that the two separate groups of people (the groups I know best are gays and lesbians in their mid 20s, and straights in their 30s and 40s) are more honest about the variety of what they get up to, or else the gays and lesbians do actually do have a more varied repetoire than the straight couples. For the two groups I know best, this could be because of the age difference and better access to the internet at an earlier age, or because for some reasons straight sex tends to be, well, straighter.

It's anecdotal, and impressionistic, but that is how it seems to me, anyway.

Sorry I didn't explain myself properly the first time.

Cheers

Ben

Upon re-reading your post (directly after I'd posted mine) I did understand the point you were trying to make. Thanks for clarifying.

I would have to say that I doubt very much whether there is much difference in regards to "kinky" sex between gay and straight couples. The surge in "dogging" and swinging clubs are cases in point.

As for the fellatio and cunnilingus, yes I agree you do lose that with a gay couple but one or the other doubles in that regard (theoretically) because there are two of the same equipment to be explored. While it necessarily means that one option is gone, it means that gay people can give their partners something that straight people can't - to a certain degree. So as for "losing options", I think it can be argued that gays 'gain' from there being a "twin-set" to rely on.

Sorry if you misunderstood Prejudice. Wasn't meaning YOU specifically. There appears to still be the concept that gay culture is based predominantly around faceless, anonymous sex. Again, as you picked up on, this is true for a significant minority.

I take your point about a heterosexual woman not using "only" with regard to promiscuous sex once or twice a week. This would mean she was a "slapper", alluding to the possibility she could have more but 'restricts herself' due to this is a societal-based constriction. Why can't a straight woman have promiscuous sex without the fear of being classed as 'tarts'? And I am sure that at least 20-30% of heterosexuals have promiscuous sex once or twice a week/month.

If you used the same word ("only") in relation to straight guys, there would be the concept that the bloke was unable to get a string of sexual partners or that there could be something wrong with him because he's unable to shag endlessly every Fri/Sat night.

Neither of these are accurate explanations for heterosexual behaviour because it is a belief that is constructed by society.

I believe, strangely, that it is the age group 25-35 which has the most promiscuous sex - certainly in the gay scene. My friend works for an AIDS charity and this decade of gay men is seeing such a stark and disporportionate rise in HIV cases that it is quite shocking. What is even more interesting is that this age group were the first to be educated on HIV and AIDS when it became wider knowledge in the mid-80s onwards. It raises questions as to the future of diagnoses and treatment as well.

Slightly off topic, but there have been reposts of a rise in STDs & HIV among 40+ age group, particularly women.
Perhaps culture has changed such that newly single people are more actively on the look out for sex than they used to be. Sounds like they're also more trusting too.

I think you are making assumptions about the sexual aptitude or open-mindedness if straight people, though. Yes, I've never had a penis, but that doesn't mean that with practice I can't get to know my boyfriend's bits as well as any man could, and vice versa. I think that's what you're trying to say, isn't it?

Lots to respond to. We really ought to get Z in here since he is going to specialise in Sexual Health Medicine.

I do find it easier to produce the desired effect (whatever that may be at the time) with bits that match mine than with bits that don't, for the sweet and simple reason that I have a much clearer idea how what I am doing actually feels.

It is a cliché to say that older generations aren't as open to sexual experimentation as younger generations, but given that baby boomers are drawing pensions now, I don't think that is arguable, if it ever was.

However, the hormonal changes involved in preganancy often make women less sexual during their childbearing years, which is the exact same time that they need to keep their man the most, so he will look after their children. I have heard too many married women say "I am no prude, and I've had my fun in my time, but..." not to think that there is a goodly proportion of the heterosexual community who prefer safety over excitement. Been there and done that myself in my time too.

I think a scene, just about any scene, gay, bdsm, swinger, whatever, encourages sexual experimentation. This is not to say that couples don't experiment - my wildest sex has been in relationships. But there is a sense of things being ok to ask for if there is a scene in the background somewhere.

Just my experience.

Ben

PS - whats 'dogging'? (Why google when you can hootoo?)

I always thought that 'dogging' was simply 'doing it' in public places, like parks, etc. Though I'm sure someone will be along soon to set this, um, straight.


az

'dogging' is, basically, people meeting in open places - like parks and (bizarrely) multi-storey car parks to watch each other have sex. It involves a lot of the 'swinging' scene activites but in the outdoors.

The straight version of 'cottaging' (men having sex with other men in public toilets, etc.).

elmsyrup: I think you are making assumptions about the sexual aptitude or open-mindedness if straight people, though. Yes, I've never had a penis, but that doesn't mean that with practice I can't get to know my boyfriend's bits as well as any man could, and vice versa. I think that's what you're trying to say, isn't it?

If you mean that *I* am doing this, then I apologise for any inference. I was stating, perhaps in a confusing way, that I don't perceive much difference in the sex that gay and straight couples/partners/one-nighters have. I doubt the frequency is that different across most age ranges and sexual preferences. Even though gay men are stereotyped as being more promiscuous.

The main difference is that you have different options within each scenario. Ben alluded to the fact that there may be fewer in gay relationships but that gay people were more inventive in these situations. I disagreed stating that, although there was no vagina for gay men, there was just as much likelihood of shared interaction (I actually said double but this was in mocking) with heightened intensity (perhaps).

Again, apologies if you felt I was accentuating gay sex over straight sex. Perish the thought!