Most of the material below is published in an analytical report. “The rhetoric of the homosexual movement in the light of scientific facts”. doi:10.12731/978-5-907208-04-9, ISBN 978-5-907208-04-9

Introduction

One of the arguments of the activists of the “LGBT” movement is that the partnership of homosexuals is the so-called. “Homosexual families” - supposedly no different from heterosexual families with traditional values ​​and worldview. The prevailing picture in the media is that homosexual relationships are as healthy, stable and loving as normal heterosexual relationships, or even surpassing them. This picture is not true, and many representatives of the homosexual community honestly admit it. People of the same sex who engage in sexual relations are at increased risk of STDs, physical trauma, mental disorders, substance abuse, suicide and intimate partner violence. This article will focus on three significant features of interpersonal homosexual relationships that strikingly distinguish them from heterosexual ones:
• promiscuity and related practices;
• short-lived and non-monogamous relationships;
• increased rates of violence in partnership.

Contents:

PROMISCUITY
SEX IN PUBLIC PLACES
“GAY SAUNAS”
HIGH NUMBER OF PARTNERS
BAGCHASING
INSTABILITY AND NON-EXCLUSIVITY OF PARTNERSHIPS
PARTNERSHIP VIOLENCE

Key findings

(1) In homosexual registered partnerships and cohabiting couples, especially among men, there is a much higher level of sexual licentiousness than in the heterosexual population.
(2) Homosexual partnerships and “marriages” are predominantly sexually “open” - they allow sexual relations outside the couple.
(3) On average, homosexual officially registered partnerships and “marriages” are significantly shorter than heterosexual marriages.
(4) The levels of violence in homosexual partnerships and cohabiting couples, especially among women, are higher than in the heterosexual population.

Promiscuity

In sexual relations between men, promiscuity is the norm and a major factor in the spread of STDs. The adoption by a homosexual of “gay identity” and his involvement in the “LGBT” movement significantly increase his sexual licentiousness (Van de ven xnumx) Prominent gay journalist Randy Shilts saidthat promiscuity "Was the core of the raging gay movement of 70's" (Shilts 1987). Homosexual publicist Gabriel Rotello wrote that the “gay” movement is based on:

"... sexual fraternity of promiscuity and any deviation from this promiscuity would mean treason on a gigantic scale ..." (Rotello 1998)

Lust, sodomy, phalluses, and the pornographic presentation of promiscuity with multiple partners are the leading motifs in homosexual literature, the stage, the visual arts, and other forms of art.

This mural on the walls of a New York public toilet was done by American pop art star Keith Haring in honor of the 20th anniversary of the Stonewall riots. Less than a year has passed, as the author of this art, described How “A tribute to the more carefree days of toilet sex” и "The grandiose and uncompromising triumph of gay sexuality"died of AIDS at the age of 31.

The AIDS epidemic that broke out at the beginning of the 1980's only insignificantly reduced the sexual fervor of homosexual men, and even then for a short time. The growing public tolerance for homosexuals and the development of drugs for the treatment and prevention of AIDS have contributed to the resumption of an increased level of promiscuity, which is now greatly facilitated by numerous dating sites and mobile phone applications.

“Grindr” is the most popular geo-location geo-application, which allows GPS to determine the distance to a sexual target. Its original logo, reminiscent of the signs “Do not get in it” or “Caution poison”, with eccentric frankness indicated that the services it provides can be life threatening. As shown research, about 50% of users of such applications do not use condoms. Application also actively used rapists, robbers and serial killers. Homosexual author and activist Gary Lambert He claimedthat there is not a single 50-year-old homosexual who would not know at least one person killed during an accidental acquaintance. According to Lambert, a strong obsessive-compulsive need for sex dominates the consciousness of “gays,” and for many of them the main goal in life is:

“… The embodiment of their lustful fantasies and the achievement of a certain intimacy with other men. The threat of HIV infection only strengthens their desires, because the greater the danger, the more acute the sensations ”(Lambert 1993).

What Lambert said echoes the experience of former president of the American Psychological Association, Nicholas Cummings, who ran a clinic in San Francisco:

“In the gay community, sexual relations were completely open and mundane; it was the main way of communication. In the afternoon, everyone went looking for sexual adventures in Buena Vista Park, and that was the right thing, since everyone was there for it. Anonymous sex turned into a fetish. In those years, it was very difficult to find a men's toilet without a hole in the wall of the cabin. There were special booths in sex cinemas where a visitor leaning over watched porn films, and at that time someone went into the booth, had anal sex and left him, and he did not even know who it was. It was very popular.
There were bars where visitors were dressed only in cowboy chapas (leather legs with an open groin), that is, in fact, they were naked. In some bars there were baths for urination, and a person could climb into them, while others urinated on him. It was very common.
In San Francisco, there was an abandoned railway tunnel, where at night in complete darkness the partners were found to touch. Once they killed someone there, it was in the news, and what would you think? - The number of visitors has increased 4 times.
I had patients who were unable to have sex with the same partner twice. I was also visited by patients who were tired of a short-term relationship. Most homosexual relationships last about 3 months. Everyone is busy searching for “that one”. I made fun of patients, telling them that in their search they decided to sleep with the whole city, otherwise there will be no certainty that they did not miss “that one”, and laughing, they said: “But you understood correctly, doc” ”(Cummings xnumx).

Founder of the gay movement in the USA, Harry Haye, argued that homosexual contacts in public restrooms or parks are “civil rights” and any attempt to stop such public order violations is “police brutality” and “oppression”Jennings xnumx).

Gay activists Kirk and Madsen, addressing homosexual behavior issues in the book “After The Ball"Write the following:

“Perhaps the most malignant form of unacceptable gay behavior is public sex ... Despite the authorities' attempts to suppress this phenomenon, the homosexual cohort continues day and night to indulge in one of the most heinous gay excesses (often in front of straight people) in public toilets, parks and alleys all major cities in the United States. These people make no attempt to ensure the confidentiality of their occupation, even if they wait for a lull in the flow of visitors. However, for many, the possibility of being caught red-handed is three-quarters of the excitement. They masturbate in urinals, wander around completely naked in the room, and fell on each other in acrobatic positions in open booths. When they pour out semen - on toilet seats, walls or floors - they leave it frozen there in disgusting and easily identifiable puddles ... It seems incredible that gay men can be so reckless, but many of them are controlled more by their penises than their brains ... Amazingly, some gays are convinced that they have every right to get up to such tricks in public toilets and parks, as if they were created specifically for them as a sexual playground. Some go so far as to resent visitors who, once in Rome, do not want to behave like the Romans ... The gay press readily condemns any comments that such public pranks are a bad idea, and condemns police efforts to end the phenomenon as 'harassment against gays' ... " (Kirk and Madsen 1990).

In 1978, the American playwright Larry Kramer, known for his homosexual preferences, wrote a novel called "Homosexuals"¹, which caused a storm of indignation of LGBT + activists - the movement and even the demand to ban it (Baim xnumx) And all because the novel, as Kramer himself stated, showed the true reality of the subculture of homosexuals. The novel takes place in special clubs and saunas, dominated by promiscuous sexual intercourse, sadomasochistic orgies and drug use. At the presentation of his book, Kramer said:

"... What is so terrible I did? I have outlined the truth in writing. What I've done? I just told the fucking truth to everyone I ever knew ... ”(Baim xnumx).

Then, in an article published in the homosexual magazine “The Advocate,” Kramer wrote the following:

“AIDS among gay men is not going anywhere ... You cannot indiscriminately fuck with multiple partners who do the same without spreading a disease that has been fatal for many years. Nature always charges a price for sexual promiscuity ... We must create a new culture that is not so tragically limited and focused on our obsession with our penises and what we do with them. " (Kramer 1997)

“Gay saunas”

Despite the development of Internet technologies, the so-called. “Gay saunas”, existing for the purpose of indiscriminate anonymous contacts and played a significant role in the spread of HIV infection, continue to flourish in most large cities. The 2003 study of the year showed that more than 30% of homosexual men attend these establishments with an average number of sexual partners about 27 people per year (Woods xnumx) In the semi-darkness of one of these “saunas,” for three years after making a fatal diagnosis and right up to his death, he indulged in unprotected sexual intercourse with 250 partners per year Gaetan Duga, which has become one of the main vectors for the spread of HIV in the United States. That's how describes the “Gay sauna” former homosexual Joseph Schiambra, whose addictions ended for him with partial removal of the rectum and almost cost his life:

“The layout consisted of a series of oddly spaced zones that grew darker as we went deeper. The décor included all the masculine clichés: polished chrome, black vinyl cushions and bodybuilder murals. The areas in front were the most detailed, behind which were almost empty rooms painted black. Rejection existed, but it was subtle, and everyone, even the saggy and elderly, could find a mate. As a last resort, there were men loitering in the back rooms who needed only a male body with blood flowing through his veins. I left the shower room and walked over to the large section dedicated to kettlebells and various training benches. The gunmetal gray of the walls resembled a machine shop or garage. I could only make out fuzzy outlines similar to human forms. Ahead I could barely make out a dimly lit rectangular bench, which, like the floor, was covered in dark material. Leaning over the bench, several naked men were kneeling. I couldn't see their heads or faces, only their raised butts. I stood motionless for a few seconds. Here it is. I have reached the culmination of my deepest desires. The literal end for every gay man is to kneel, spreading his buttocks, hoping that some man will appear. "Sciambra xnumx).

Shilts приводит 1982 Center for Disease Control (CDC) 50 study of homosexuals diagnosed GRID (formerly called AIDS). It turned out that the average number of sexual partners in patients was 1100, and several patients reported 20. The average number of partners for a homosexual control group without disease was 000. Shilts explains the rampant debauchery prevailing in the gay environment by the lack of restraining influence of women and the excessive abundance of testosterone:

“There is nothing in the gay subculture that could moderate the purely masculine values, realized as drunkenly as any heterosexual macho had never dreamed of. Promiscuity is widespread, because in a subculture consisting of only men, there is no one to say no. No one has any moderating role similar to that of a woman in a heterosexual environment. Some heterosexual men admitted that they would be delighted with the idea of ​​immediate, accessible, even anonymous sex offered by gay saunas if they could only find women willing to do so. Gays, of course, agree quite often. ” (Shilts 1987)

In the video clip below, an AIDS patient homosexual patient claims that he had at least 50 sexual partners in one night

Here's the revelation Kirk and Madsen give:

“The only ticket to gay life is visual appeal, but even that will not save you from disappointment ... Arriving in the city, he found that there is only one thing that gay life is focused on: f * l ... When a person is young and inexperienced, the simplest "vanilla" relationships - hugs and mutual masturbation - are more than enough for him. This is something new, forbidden, dirty, and exciting. Over time, vanilla sex with one partner becomes habitual, mundane and boring, and loses its ability to arouse. At first, a jaded homosexual looks for newness in partners, becoming incredibly promiscuous and promiscuous. Eventually all bodies become boring for him, and he begins to look for excitement in new practices. He tries to restore the erectile thrill through the dirty and forbidden aspects of sex, such as fetishism, urolagnia, coprophilia, etc. " (Kirk and Madsen 1990).

The level of sexual promiscuity described above in the homosexual community is consistent with research data.

A study by Bell and colleagues (1978) reports that 70% of homosexuals admitted to having sex with more than 50% of their partners only once, 43% of homosexuals admit to 500 or more partners throughout their lives, 28% they are recognized in 1000 or more throughout their lives, and among these people, 79% say that half of those partners were completely unfamiliar to them, and 70% of these sexual contacts were for one nightBell 1978) According to Pollack and colleagues, the average homosexual changes dozens of partners each year, and several hundred throughout their lives (Pollak in Aries xnumx, pages 40 – 51).

By 1984, after the AIDS epidemic broke out, the homosexual movement urged its members to moderate promiscuity, but this did not have a strong effect: instead of> 6 partners per month in 1982, the average non-monogamous respondent in San Francisco in 1984 indicated that he had communication with about 4 partners per month (McKusick 1984²) In subsequent years, the CDC noted an increase in sexual licentiousness among young gay men in San Francisco: from 1994 to 1997, the proportion of homosexuals who have had contact with many partners and unprotected anal-genital contact increased from 23,6% to 33,3%, with the highest increase among young men to 25 years old (CDC 1999) Despite its incurability, AIDS no longer deter homosexuals from practicing promiscuity (Hoover xnumx; Kelly 1992).

In a survey of more than 2583 elderly homosexuals, it was found that on average they had from 100 to 500 partners during their lifetime, while 12% had more than 1000 partners (Van de ven xnumx) Also in the same study, it was found that for homosexuals belonging to the homosexual movement, the likelihood that they had more than 50 sexual partners during the previous 6 months is four times higher than for homosexuals who are not members of the homosexual movement (Van de ven xnumx).

A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre showed that 24% of respondents said that they had more than a hundred sexual partners in their lives. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including in the survey the category of “more than a thousand sexual partners” (Lambda Report 1998).

In another Research, which lasted about 6 months, the average number of sexual partners in homosexuals positive for hepatitis A was 68,2 ± 13. The number of previous sexual partners averaged 713 for those whose homosexual practice lasted an average of 11,5 years, and 1054 those whose homosexual practice lasted an average of 17,8 years. (Corey 1980).

Interesting data was obtained in a study by Bell and colleagues (1978) - the authors, among other things, examined whether respondents had sexual contact with animals. Among men, 19,5% of homosexuals and 5,4% of heterosexual men answered in the affirmative; among homosexual women, 6,5% answered yes, heterosexual women answered negatively (Bell xnumx, 1981) When asked about the practice of sexual sadism, 26% of homosexual men, 4,5% of heterosexual men, 9,6% of homosexual women and 2,7 of heterosexual women answered in the affirmative (Bell xnumx).

In a study of male homosexual couples, 41% had open sexual agreements with certain conditions or restrictions, and 10% had open sexual agreements without restrictions. 22% reported a violation of the agreed conditions in the previous 12 months, and 13% of the sample reported unprotected anal intercourse in the previous three months with an outside partner with an unknown or doubtful HIV status (Neilands 2010)

Promiscuity among homosexual women is less common than among homosexual men, but it is still higher than among heterosexual women. Surprisingly, there is an amazing observation in the literature that among homosexual women, the level of sexual licentiousness with men (!) Is higher than among heterosexual women. Australian researchers reported that the likelihood that a homosexual woman will have more than 50 male partners during her life is 4,5 times higher than that for heterosexual women (9% vs 2%); and 93% of homosexual women had sex with men (Price 1996; Ferris 1996).

Research has shown that relaxed sexual behavior, usually beginning at an early age, is positively correlated with homosexuality. Sexually unrestrained women have an increased number of sexual partners, many of whom may statistically be women. According to a recent study, women who have multiple same-sex partners have even more opposite sex partners (Kanazawa xnumx).

Over the past two decades, the lesbian community became more sexualized. Erotic magazines, sex toy stores, and pornographic companies targeted at and managed by lesbians have spread. Lesbian clubs advertise “I Love Pussy” evenings and proudly flaunt “activity” in the toilet cubicles. Lesbian BDSM organizations exist in most major US cities, and polyamory is also becoming more common.

Bagging

A number of observations have been accumulated that some homosexual men practice voluntary and deliberate infection of themselves with HIV infection through unprotected sexual contact with an HIV-positive person. In English, for this phenomenon, the terms “bugchaser” are used - “bug hunter” and “giftgiver” - “donor”. For the first time, cases of voluntary HIV infection were first discussed in the midst of the HIV epidemic, in the mid-80-s, when the first scientific articles on this topic appeared (Frances 1985; Flavin 1986).

Back in 1999, in an article in SFGate magazine in San Francisco, it was said that so-called gay populations were growing in popularity. Russian Roulette or Bearbacking Sex Game³- parties; that is, when groups of young men meet to practice homosexual orgies, following three rules: no clothes, no condoms, and no talk about HIV status, even if at least one of the participants is HIV-positive (Russel 1999).

A more accurate description of “bug-chasing” appeared a little later - in 2003, when the journalist Gregory Freeman published an article “In Search of Death” in the magazine “Rolling Stone”, in which he said that a new sexual fetish appeared among homosexual men: when alone homosexuals want to receive targeted HIV, while others want to infect them with pleasure (Freeman xnumx, removed from the Rolling Stone website).

“... Conscious HIV infection for them is the overthrow of an extreme taboo, the most extreme sexual act that attracts some homosexuals who are ready to try everything. Others feel lost in a group living with HIV from the gay community. Baggage owners want to become part of this “club”. Some say that bagchasing opens the door to sexual nirvana. And some people cannot stand the thought that they don’t look like their HIV-positive lover ... ”(Freeman 2003).

Although Freeman’s article sparked a flurry of criticism from LGBT + affiliates, a movement of publicists who accused Freeman of exaggerating the extent of the problem or manipulating information, scientific evidence does indicate similar practices among homosexuals. Researchers Gossier and Forsyth in 1999 for the first time described in their scientific work the desire for targeted HIV infection among practitioners of promiscuity and unprotected sex of homosexualsGauthier xnumx) In 2003, Dr. Richard Tewkesbury described, the first in the scientific community, how homosexuals who practice “bagging” use the Internet and specific dating sites (Tewksbury 2003; 2006) In 2004, the prevalence of such practices among homosexuals was described by Crossley (Crossley xnumx) Large-scale studies of the use of the Internet among homosexual “bagcheisers” were conducted by Grove researchers and colleagues (Grov 2006a; 2006b; 2004) In 2007, American scientists Moskowitz and Roloff identified several reasons why some homosexuals want to become infected with HIV: one of the reasons is the desire to enter into a special “brotherhood of initiates”, more united than a disparate group of homosexual men (Moskowitz 2007a) Another reason is the reluctance to protect oneself and the desire to freely have sex without fear of contracting HIV. The third group includes people who deny AIDS as such and reject “AIDS hysteria” as a fictitious theory. Moskowitz and Roloff compared bagchising with strong sexual dependence: in their opinion, men who want to get the virus usually have an unintelligible sex life, entering into frequent unprotected sex with both HIV-positive people and those whose HIV status is unknown (Moskowitz 2007a) The mental characteristics of homosexuals practicing “bagging” and the reasons for this behavior are also described in other works (Moskowitz 2007b; LeBlanc 2007; Hatfield 2004; Blechner xnumx) Here is how describes the their Joseph Shyambra:

“By that time I was sick so often that I was sure that I was already infected. Then I joined the ranks of fearless, presumably HIV-negative “bug-chasers” and those who were already infected. In these groups, the pretentiousness of safe sex was either completely absent, or the atmosphere was too excited and too hot for someone to stop and open the package with a condom. The most fanatical followers were those who dreamed of contracting the virus from an HIV-positive donor. The complete impossibility of conception through same-sex sex left a subconscious sense of lifelessness in all those involved. The reimbursement consisted of introducing a charged particle into the semen, which could potentially overcome the membrane of each cell, changing the receiver forever ” (Sciambra xnumx).

Instability and non-exclusivity of partnerships

Homosexuals, even having long-term relationships with each other, are less likely to be faithful to each other. For traditional families, a national representative survey published in the Journal of Sex Research found that 77% of married men and 88% of married women are true to their marriage vows (Wiederman xnumx) In another national survey, it was found that 75% of husbands and 85% of wives never had sexual relations outside of marriage (Laumann xnumx) A telephone survey of adult respondents by 1049 for Parade magazine showed: 81% of married men and 85% of married women reported never breaking their marriage vows (PR Newswire 1994). According to a review of 1995 data, 83% of men and 95% of women reported monogamy (Paik 2010) Thus, traditional heterosexual relationships, including marriage - the union of a man and a woman - are predominantly sexually exclusive, that is, sexual intercourse outside of marriage is unacceptable.

As for homosexual relations, including those officially registered, such partnerships are predominantly sexually non-exclusive - on average, each partner has two parallel connections during the year (Rosenberg 2011) A McWhirter study (1985) found that for a duration of 1 to 5, only 4,5% of homosexuals report monogamy, and for a duration of more than 5, none. The authors concluded that:

“Expectation of external sexual activity is the rule for male couples and the exception for heterosexuals. Heterosexual couples live with some hope that their relationship will last “until death do them part”, while same-sex couples wonder if their relationship will survive ... The single most important factor keeping couples together after a decade is lack of possessiveness. to friend". (McWhirter 1985, p.3, p.256).

Harry (1984) reports that 66% of homosexual men admit to having sex on the side during the first year of the relationship, and if they last more than five years, the number of people admitted increases to 90%.

Sarantakos (1998d) found that only 10% of male couples and 17% of female couples were intentionally monogamous. Prior to this, he showed that only 19% of homosexual couples have not separated in the last 5 years, while 66% of male and 63% of female couples broke up with three or more partners (Sarantakos 1996c).

A study in the Netherlands found that homosexual relationships last an average of one and a half years. At the same time, homosexuals who are not in a long relationship have about 22 random sexual partners per year, and those who are in a long relationship⁴, - “only” 8 “lovers” per year (Lampinen 2003; Xiridou 2003) A survey conducted in 2006 by researchers from the University of California among homosexuals and heterosexual men found that more than half of homosexual men (51%) were not in any permanent relationship. Among heterosexual men, this share was 15% (Strohm 2006) In a Canadian study of homosexuals who have been in contact with a partner for at least 1, it was found that only 25% had no external connections. According to the author of the study:

“… Homosexual culture allows men to try different… forms of relationships, not just heterosexual-imposed monogamy…” (Lee 2003).

According to Exploration 2013 years, about 70% of HIV infections among homosexuals occurs through a regular partner, since the vast majority of adultery occurs without the use of a condom (Brady 2013). Marriage therapist Dr. Hayton described the attitude of many homosexuals to marriage:

"... Homosexuals are convinced and set an example that marital relations are temporary and mostly sexual in nature ... In the homosexual community, the prevailing opinion is that monogamy in marriage is not the norm and should not be encouraged in good" marriage "relationships ..." ( Hayton 1993).

In the 2005 survey, it was found that “40,3% of homosexual men who are members of“ civil unions ”and 49,3% of those who were not in such unions discussed and agreed to allow outside sexual relations. For comparison, among traditional families this indicator was equal to 3,5% ”(Solomon 2005).

The Pollak researcher found that “only some homosexual relationships last for more than two years, many of them indicate that they had more than 100 sexual partners” (Pollak in Aries xnumx).

Whitehead (2017) conducted a comparative study of the duration of relationships between heterosexual couples and between registered partnerships of homosexuals of both sexes based on studies of the largest published studies in the United States and Britain (Whitehead 2017) Average duration⁵ homosexual partnerships was 3,5 years, and the average duration of relationships in heterosexual families was 27 years; thus, the duration of relationships in officially registered homosexual partnerships is more than seven times shorter than heterosexual family relationships (Whitehead 2017).

A homosexual-sympathetic author describes the relationship between homosexuals as follows:

“... in the gay world, the only real criterion of value is physical attractiveness ... A young homosexual will find that he is usually interested in his homosexual brothers only as a sexual object. Although they can invite him to dinner and give him a place to stay, when they have satisfied their sexual interest in him, they are more likely to forget about his existence and his personal needs. " (Hoffman xnumx)

In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage, requiring all states to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples, and to recognize such certificates issued in other jurisdictions. However, as the Gallup American Public Opinion Institute shows, homosexuals are in no hurry to take advantage of their newly acquired rights. If before the universal legalization of same-sex marriages, 7.9% of American homosexuals were “married” (concluding them where permitted), then after legalization only 2.3% decided to formalize their relationship. A year after the decision of the Supreme Court, only 9.5% of American homosexuals were in same-sex “marriages”, most of them at the age of 50 + (Jones xnumx) A similar picture is observed in the Netherlands, where same-sex marriage has been legalized since 2001 of the year: only 12% of homosexuals are “married”, compared to 86% of their heterosexual peers.

Joseph Ciambra quoted above explains this is because homosexual men do not want to limit their sexual appetites to relationships with one partner:

“Under the imperative of male biology, freed from the objections of wives and girlfriends, homosexual men are prone to numerous partnerships and restlessness, hence relatively low number same-sex marriage (9,6%), which after the decision of Obergefell increased only by 1,7%, as well as preservation of HIV infection among men in supposedly stable relationships. Relations between homosexual men are predominantly not monogamous, but negotiated open relationships. Nevertheless, an appearance is created that equates male homosexuality with heterosexuality or even lesbianism. ” (Sciambra xnumx). 

Unlike heterosexuals, “marriages”, “monogamy” and “fidelity” for homosexual men rarely mean one partner. So in the manual The Handbook of Family Diversity (1999) a study is presented in which many couples who consider themselves to be “monogamous” reported that over the past year they had an average of 3 – 5 partners.

British journalist Milo Yannopoulos describes the essence of gay relationships as follows:

“I always have one main friend who can provide me financially. This is usually a doctor, banker, or something like that. And I also have a couple of friends for sex - personal trainers, athletes. I invite them, and that main boyfriend invites me ... The fact is, we have opportunities that you do not have. We have a very significant permissiveness that frees us from all formalities. That's why gay marriage is so ridiculous. My God, whoever wants to be with one person is awful ”(Yiannopoulos 2016).

As practice shows, contrary to hysteria about same-sex marriage, the vast majority of homosexuals do not need them at all. How can this paradox be explained? To begin with, same-sex relationships are unstable in nature. If in a natural relationship, a man and a woman complement each other with their biological and psychological differences, then in same-sex relationships there is no harmony of complementarity, which is why homosexuals experience enduring dissatisfaction, expressed in an unceasing search. As the psychiatrist Edmund Bergler noted:

“The worst heterosexual relationships are idyll compared to the best homosexuals” (Bergler 1956, p. 17).

So the opportunity to marry a partner of the same sex does not change the fact that such relationships do not work.

A curious explanation for the lack of monogamy among gay men is offered by former homosexual William Aaron. It is noteworthy that he uses the word “homophile”, popular in 60's but forgotten now (like a bestiality, pedophile, etc.):

“In gay life, loyalty is almost impossible. Since part of the homosexual compulsion seems to be the homophile's need to "absorb" the masculinity of his sexual partners, he must constantly be on the lookout for [new partners]. Consequently, the most successful homophile “marriages” are those in which there is an agreement between partners to have an affair on the side, maintaining the appearance of consistency in their life structure ... Gay life is most typical and works best when sexual contacts are impersonal and even anonymous. As a group, homosexuals I knew seem much more preoccupied with sex than heterosexuals ... ”(William Aaron 1972, p.208)

Bergler, describing the psychological portrait of a typical homosexual, also notes the preference for anonymous sex and the constant dissatisfaction leading to an ongoing search:

“The typical homosexual is constantly on the lookout. His “cruising” (a homosexual term for finding a two-minute or at best a short-term partner) is more extensive than that of a heterosexual neurotic who specializes in one-night stands. According to homosexuals, this proves that they crave variety and have an insatiable sexual appetite. In fact, this only proves that homosexuality is a poor and unsatisfactory sexual diet. It also proves the existence of a constant masochistic desire for danger: every time on their cruises, a homosexual is at risk of beating, attempts at extortion or sexually transmitted diseases ... Many homosexual contacts take place in toilets, in obscurity parks and Turkish baths, where the sex object is not even visible. Such impersonal means of reaching “contact” make visiting a heterosexual brothel look like an emotional experience. ” (Bergler 1956, p. 16)

Here's how the activists Kirk and Madsen mentioned above describe the essence of homosexual relationships:

“Homosexuals are not very good at acquiring and retaining partners. Relations between them usually do not last long, although most sincerely seek to find a soul mate. In other words, everyone is looking, but no one is. How to explain this paradox? Firstly, this is due to the peculiarities of male physiology and psychology, which make a man’s sexual and romantic relationship with a man less stable in nature than a man’s relationship with a woman. On average, a woman’s sex drive is less intense than a man’s, and less aroused by visual stimuli. A woman is more sexually receptive to her emotions than to what she sees. Men, on the other hand, are not only more sexually preoccupied (almost always), but also quickly and very excited with the mere sight of an “ideal” partner.

Secondly, sexual arousal is highly dependent on "mystery", that is, the degree of unknown between partners. It is obvious that physically and emotionally, men are more alike than women, and therefore less unknown there. This, as a rule, leads homosexuals to quickly overwork from their partners. Interestingly, this is even more true for lesbians, whose passion passes very quickly, but since their sexual needs are relatively modest, they are easily satisfied with emotional relationships.

The only criterion by which most homosexuals choose their connections is sexual attractiveness. Constant relationships with strangers and people who are indifferent to them ultimately become stronger in the usual superficiality and unwillingness to judge by more important criteria. The creed of such a homosexual can be expressed as: “Karl, although an asshole, but he has a big eldak, perhaps I'll go home with him.”

Emotional immaturity, fear of obligations and a strong sense of inferiority lead many homosexuals to massive promiscuity. Confident at heart of their own worthlessness, they suppress this terrible feeling with constant confirmation that they are sexually desired, indulging in promiscuous sexual relations with anonymous partners. And although almost every homosexual will say that he would like to find true love, his demands are so exaggerated and unrealistic that he leaves himself almost no chance to meet such a person. For example, he should not drink, smoke, be interested in art, the beach, guacamole, look and behave like a straight man, dress well; have a sense of humor, a “right” social background; should not have much hair on the body; should be healthy, smoothly shaved, trimmed. . . well, you get the point.

Why do homosexuals put themselves in such a position? Firstly, because they prefer to live in fantasies than to deal with reality. Secondly, it gives them a convenient excuse why they still have no one, and that indiscriminate and impersonal sex is actually the search for that one.

“Unwillingness” to have any personal relationships is often a banal inability to have them. People suffering from this problem will go to any extreme to rationally explain their inadequacy, up to writing books that justify their “lifestyle” as a “revolutionary political statement” and “performance of vagrant artists of sexual street theater”.

When, for want of a better man, a homosexual man agrees to a mere mortal, the battle for love does not end there - it only begins. The average Joni Gay will tell you that he is looking for a “hassle-free” relationship in which the lover “is not too involved, does not make demands, and gives him enough personal space.” In reality, no space will be enough, because Joni is not looking for a lover, but for the “fuck buddy” henchman - a buddy for fucking, a kind of unpretentious household appliance. When an emotional attachment begins to appear in a relationship (which, in theory, should be the most reasonable reason for them), they cease to be comfortable, become “troublesome” and fall apart. Nevertheless, not all homosexuals are looking for such a dry "relationship." Some want a true mutual romance, and even find it. What happens then? Sooner or later, the one-eyed serpent will raise its ugly head.

There has never been a tradition of loyalty in the gay community. No matter how happy a homosexual is with his lover, he will most likely end up looking for x **. The rate of infidelity between "married" homosexuals, over time, approaches 100%. Men, as already mentioned, are more excitable than women, who have a stabilizing influence, and some cute face in the subway or supermarket can easily turn their heads. Two gays are a double problem, which arithmetically squares the probability of a fatal affair. Many homosexual couples, bowing to the inevitable, agree to "open relationships." Sometimes it works: after letting off steam, the restless lover returns to the partner who is more important to him than others. But this does not always work. Sometimes an open relationship is more suitable for one partner than another, who eventually admits that they cannot stand it and leaves. Sometimes it is just a tacit admission that relationships are no longer based on love, but on sexual and everyday convenience. The latter can become especially disgusting: lovers, or rather roommates, turn into accomplices, helping each other to find partners for sex for three ”... (Kirk and Madsen 1990).

According to the clinical picture of Dr. Nicolosi, both partners in homosexual relationships usually experience protective alienation from their sex coming from childhood and the need to compensate for it. Therefore, their relationship often takes the form of an unrealistic idealization of another man as a prototype of masculine introject. In search of relationships with other men and their sexualization, the homosexual is trying to reintegrate the lost part of his personality. In pursuit of another man to make up for his lack of masculine qualities, a homosexual either develops self-derogatory dependence on his partner, or experiences bitter disappointment when he finds in him exactly the same lack of masculinity as he does.

Disappointed, he goes in search of another, more satisfying partner. Since his attraction arises from deficiency, he cannot love freely: his ambivalent attitude towards his gender and protective estrangement impede the establishment of trust and intimacy. He perceives other men only in terms of what they can do to make up for his insufficiency. In these respects they take, not give.

A depressed man can temporarily feel at his best with the help of anonymous sex - due to his arousal, intensity and even danger, with subsequent sexual discharge and an immediate decrease in tension. But this is only a matter of time, until he again becomes depressed, and again turns to anonymous sex as a short-term solution to his spiritual discomfort. Often a homosexual client reports seeking anonymous sex after an incident in which he felt ignored or offended by another man.

Partnership Violence

According to LGBT health care allowance, “Sexual minorities are more likely to experience severe physical and mental conditions, such as domestic violence and substance abuse ...” (Makadon 2008) Lesbians are more likely than homosexual men to be victims and initiators of violence (Waldner-Haugrud 1997²).

An APA study found that 47,5% of lesbians have ever experienced physical abuse from a partner. Among homosexuals, partner violence was reported by 38.8% (Balsam xnumx) CDC presented similar data - 40,4% of lesbians were physically abused by a partner; in 29,4%, violence was serious: beating, moxibustion or or hitting something hard (Walters xnumx).

In a sample of battered homosexual men, 73% of them were victims of sexual violence by a partner (Merrill 2000) Welles and colleagues found that 49% of black men in same-sex relationships were physically abused and 37% were sexually abused (Welles xnumx).

The “LGBT Family Research Journal” reported that 70,2% of lesbians have experienced psychological abuse over the past year (Matte & Lafontaine 2011) Another study showed that 69% of women involved in same-sex relationships report verbal aggression, while 77,5% report controlling behavior on the part of the partner. For homosexual men, these data were 55,6% and 69,6%, respectively (Messinger 2011). According to the CDC survey, on average 63,5% of lesbians experienced psychological aggression from a partner, most often manifested in isolation from family and friends, humiliation, insults and assurances that no one else needs them (Walters xnumx).

Lie and colleagues note that aggression in lesbian relationships is most often mutual. In their sample, 23,1% of lesbians reported forced sex from their current partner, and 9,4% from their former partner. In addition, 55.1% reported verbal and emotional aggression (Lie et al. Xnumx) Another study found that compared to 17,8% of heterosexual women, 30,6% of lesbians had sex against their will (Duncan 1990), but according to Waldner-Haugrud (1997¹) 50% of lesbians experienced forced penetration by their partner, which is only 5% less than homosexual men.

An 1994 article of the year in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence addressed issues of conflict and violence in female homosexual partnerships (Lockhart 1994) Researchers found that 31% of respondents reported having experienced at least one episode of physical abuse by a partner. According to Nichols (2000), 54% of homosexual women reported having experienced 10 or more episodes of violence by partners, 74% indicated 6 – 10 episodes (Nichols xnumx).

The National Violence against Women Survey survey showed that “same-sex cohabitation has a significantly higher level of violence than in same-sex cohabitation. 39% of cohabitants reported physical and mental abuse by a partner compared to 21,7% of respondents from heterosexual cohabitations. Among men, these figures are, respectively, 23,1% and 7,4% ”(CDC 2000).

In their work, Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them, Island and Letellier estimated that “the incidence of domestic violence in homosexual male partnerships is almost twice as high as in the heterosexual population” (Island xnumx).

According to a study published by the Government of Canada in 2006:

"... spousal violence occurred twice as often among homosexual couples as compared with heterosexual ones: 15% and 7%, respectively" (Statistics Canada - Catalog no. 85-570, p.39).

Additional Information

Additional information and details can be found in the following sources:

1. Dailey tj Comparing the Lifestyles of Homosexual Couples to Married Couples. Family Research Council. 2004.
2. Cameron P. Domestic violence among homosexual partners. Psychol Rep. 2003 Oct; 93 (2): 410-6. DOI: 10.2466 / pr0.2003.93.2.410
3. Reisman J. The Reisman & Johnson Report. Applied to “Homosexual Marriage” And “Hate Crimes”. Preliminary Progress Report. A Working draft 2008. First Principles Press. pp. 8 – 11.

Notes

1 English: "Faggots"
2 In 1982, respondents indicated that they had an average of 4,7 new partners during the previous month; 1984 - 2,5 new partners for the same period.
3 eng .: "Barebacking" - riding bareback. This refers to genital-anal penetration (“anal” sex) without a condom.
4 live with a “registered regular partner”
5 time from registration to termination of homosexual partnership or “marriage”