From: Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality,ca.politics
Subject: Facts on Gays and Number of Partners
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 00:06:05 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

doc931/gayprom.txt

Are Gays Promiscuous? (More Politely - have more sexual partners on
average than heterosexuals?)

Disclaimer - this does should be be construed as reason or
justification to dislike, stereotype, or attack gays as a group, or to
judge multiple partner sex as neccesarily immoral or bad. It is merely
to dispell myths and error as to the statistical facts of the matter
of the number of sexual partners, and the HIV hazards of high numbers
of partners.

Although it appears gays do not believe that promiscuity is bad in
itself, they are aware that the much of the outside world believes
that it is bad, and therefore conclude that gays are bad on this
basis. I agree this blanket judgement is wrong. It is my position that
if gays are to convince the world that they are not bad, they cannot
use the argument that there is no evidence that as a group they may be
more promiscuous. You should not use incorrect data to support a
correct conclusion, no matter how just the cause.

It is valid to point out that most gays are not outrageously
promiscuous, and it is not neccesarily bad or a reason to hate those
who are. It is my position that homosexuality is a normal, if unusual
and not neccesarily optimally healthy condition, with advantages and
disadvantages that vary across individual cases, and that there are
aspects of the group that can and should be criticized without
categorically condemning the condition itself (as can be said for all
differing groups who find themselves to be "unusual", like Asians).

Out of 16 responses on soc.motss:
0 cite evidence that gays are not more promiscuous
5 do not challenge the statement, only saying to post elsewhere
3 say that promiscuity is not bad in any quantity
0 say promiscuity is bad or hazardous (with condoms)
4 actually believe that gays do not have more sexual partners

Here's the evidence:
(Please send me any additional documentation, and I'll update this list)

Research Report: Response to the AIDS Epidemic David E. Kanouse et. al
   published by Rand Corp,Santa Monica CA 1991

1. "Marmour and colleages (1982) for example reported an average
of ten or more partners in a typcial month among AIDS patients;

2. "Jaffe et al. (1983) found an average of 61 different partners in
the year before symptom onset"

3. "In San Francisco,.... contributed to reductions of as much as 60
percent in reported high-risk sexual paractices (Winkelstein et al, 1987),
a 60 percent decline in use of sex clubs and bathhouses."

4. "Martin (1987) reported substantial declines in median numbers of sexual
partners among a sample of homosexual men in New York City from the time
just before they became asware of AIDS (typically in 1981) to 1984-1985.
For example, the median number of partners seen in private homes dropped from
five to three, or 40 percent, the declines totaled 78 percent (from 36
to eight partners across out-of-home locations). Medians were reported only
for those making use of a location for sexual purposes at least
once during a one-year time period. The medians are therefore higher than
they would be if inactive respondents were included."

5. "study after study reported relapses in risk behavior among gay and
bisexual men (Stall et al, 1990; Pollack et. al. 1990, St. Lawrence et al. 
1990);

6. "In 1986, Communication Technologies Inc. conducted a random digit dial
survey for the LA County Dept of Health Services... the findings were ...
* Unsafe anal and oral sex occured among about one-third of the gay male
sexual encounters
* Unsafe anal sex was reported as more frequent than safe
* On average, 10.2 sexual encounters per month were reported within primary
relationships
* Nonmonogamous men reported an average of 1.8 partners in a 4 week period
and about 5.0 sexual encounters"

7. Rand RDD survey of 261 gay respondents who were sexually active in
the past year, vs. 1136 heterosexuals who had been active in the past 5
years

No. of Partners  Distribution %
past 4 wks       Homosexual   Hetero  Ratio
None             22.2         24.3    .91
One              54.8         71.9    .76
Two              14.6          2.3    6.3
Three or More     8.4          1.5    5.6

Gay men are about 5-6 times more likely than heterosexuals to have
2 or 3 or more partners in a given month.

---------------------------

8. HIV is primarily transmitted by anal multiple partner sex among gay
men, secondarily by IV drug users, many gay, with over 2/3 of cases
nationally, 90% in high-gay cities like SF. Claims that 3/4 are
heterosexual worldwide are heavily weighted by cases in Africa, and
bear no relevance to the epidemic in the USA where conditions are
substantially different. AIDS among heterosexuals who do not know IV
drug users or partners at risk or do not live in areas with high HIV
incidence is still rare in the US.

9. HIV Seroprevalence Report San Francisco Department of Public Health
AIDS Office October 1991 Vol 2. No. 4 p 1-4

SF Young Mens Survey 1991 of men 18-24 in gay bars had a median
number of partners of 17. (SF Health Dept) This study also showed
a strong correlation between high number of partners and high HIV rate.
66% had anal sex in the past 6 months, 85% always or sometimes used
condoms. The higher the condom use rate, the higher the HIV rate, which
indicates that condom use alone without controlling number of partners
may not be an effective strategy.

HIV+ vs. Number of partners

Number of partners(1)  N       %  HIV+
1                      8     3.2  0.0
2-9                   81    32.8  8.6
10-24                 73    29.6  8.2
25-49                 36    14.5 11.1
50+                   49    19.8 28.6
Total                247
Median                17
Average              >>17

1- limited to those who said they had at least one male partner

HIV+ vs. condom use for insertive intercouse
Did you wear a condom (of the 66% who did anal intercourse)
                        N   %   HIV+
Always                 85   56% 16.5 greater than 25-49 partners range
Sometimes              44   29% 11.4 equal to 25-49 partners
Never                  22   14%  9.1 equal 2-24 partners
Total                 151

This does not account for persons who started using condoms after
knowing they were HIV+. (still, would you have sex with someone you
knew with 100% certainty was HIV+ with only a condom to protect you,
assuming you wanted to if you could, and knowing these odds? Most in
the profession and soc.motss insist the answer should be yes.)

10. The book "Ground Zero" written by Andrew Holleran (Plume/Penguin
1988) a gay author takes it for granted that gays are promiscuous, and
that promiscuity once was, if not still is, a central feature of gay
identity. He cites cases where gays actually took infection with STDs
as symbols of victories in the battle for sexual freedom. This book
claims to be an "honest and frank" portrayal of the gay AIDS epidemic
in NYC. He also states many gays weeped over their sexual practices
once they realized the consequences, and openly advocates celibacy as
a response to the epidemic.

11. Few if any in soc.motss have ever said that promiscuity is bad or
to be discouraged. This indicates that there in no incentive or moral
reason to limit numbers of partners among that culture.

12. The Day America Told the Truth by James Patterson and Peter Kim
1991 Prentice Hall (Book) p. 137, 37

"AIDS is more common among gays, as is sex...they are twice as likely
to have sex more than once a day, and four times more likely to have
over ten or one hundred partners"

                    gay   straight ratio
Lifetime Number of lovers
100+ lovers         11%   3%       3.7
10+ lovers          16%   4%       4.0
No AIDS precautions 42%
Risk of giving AIDS 18%   6.6%     2.7

p. 72 - Homo+bi are 2 times more likely than average for multiple daily sex.

Similar to Rand study, gays are 4 times more likely to have 10 or 100+
lovers. 42 percent took no precautions against AIDS. 25 percent of gays
believed they have already had sex with HIV infected partners.

In their survey, 17% of men and 11% of women reported having sex with the
same gender, with 14% average. (That's not exactly the same as people
who prefer same-gender sex, but one possible definition of gay) This is
hardly a homophobic survey.

13. "Sex American Style:Trend to the Traditional" LA times 2-19-90
American Association for the Advancement of Science
The average American, according to the survey, had 1.2 partners in
the past 12 months, and had sex an average of 57 times, or about
once a week. 22% said that had no sex at all in the previous 12
months. Only 1% have been exclusively homosexual during their adult
lives, 5 to 6% said they had been bisexual. 98.5% had been exclusively
heterosexual in the previous year.

The average American has had 7.15 sexual partners since 18.

Subcategories:
widowed - 3.01
married - 5.72
never married - 8.67
separated - 11.75
divorced - 13.3

In all fairness, it is entirely possible that if you only picked
persons in bars, it might actually be as high as 17. On the other
hand, that doesn't compensate for the percentage of the population 
that frequents bars, so if the average gay goes to bars, and the average
heterosexual doesn't, that's a fair comparison.

70% of men said that they had at least one sexual partner in addition
to their wife durring married lives. It's 35% for women.
Only 2.4% had 5 or more partners in the past year, 3.2% had intercourse
with a complete stranger, 0.7% of males had homosexual encounter.

14. There are no studies which show number of partners are equal
between homo and hetero-sexuals known to myself, or anyone on soc.motss.

15. Heterosexaully Transmitted Human Immunideficiency Virus
Infection Among Pregant Women in a Rural Florida Community
Tedd V. Ellerbrock et. al. Dec 22 1992 New England Journal of
Medicine p. 1704

"A survey of adults in the US puts the mean number 
of sexual partners for women at 3.3"

16. Dec 22 New England Journal of Medicine: Among college women, only 21
percent reported 6 or more partners. 

17. Dec 22 New England Journal of Medicine (evidence promiscuity is
hazardous, also non-PC in that this data implies the conduct of African
American women is different from the population at large, and this is
the cause of disproportionate AIDS on women of color)

Survey of Pregnant Black and Hispanic women in rural Florida

only 0.3% of women with 1 partner were HIV+, compared
to 12.4% of those with 5+ partners. 

No of sexual 
partners     N         HIV+
1            363/35.9  1/0.3
2            174/17.2  6/3.4
3            145/14.4  7/4.8
4             94/9.3   9/9.6
>= 5         234/23.2 29/12.4

Number of partners Median/mean
HIV+     5/27
HIV-     2/5
Used crack cocaine and exchanged sex for drugs/money 50/119 HIV+=33%

For those who believe early intercourse should not be discouraged: 11%
of those with first intercourse under 13 were HIV+ vs. 0.8% of those
over 20 at first intercourse.

Age at first 
intercourse   N  %     HIV+
<= 13        128/12.7  14/10.9
14-16        478/47.4  25/5.2
17-19        280/27.8  12/4.3
>= 20        122/12.1   1/0.8

14% of those with 3 or more fathers of children were HIV+ compared to
just 2.3% with just one father.

Women who used condoms had a higher HIV rate than those who did not.
This parallels the Young Mens survey figures which were supressed that
showed a similar reverse connection between condom use and HIV rate.
Only 2.8 percent of HIV infected women who reported using condoms also
reported that they were used over 80 percent of the time.

33% of HIV positive were at no special risk other than a normal number
of sexual partners, which indicates that if there is a high incidence
of HIV, even normal behavior can be hazardous. (8% of black women were
HIV+) Most cases were due to partners at risk, high numbers of partners,
or IV drug use.

Significantly, among all the strategies recommended to combat the spread
of HIV, reduction in number of partners was NOT mentioned, a common, if
not universal and deliberate ommision in the AIDS professions.

===================================================

Here's the responses from soc.motss, the gay discussion newsgroup

In article <73520@cup.portal.com> you write:
>Mr. Michael Adams Starcad@uiuc.edu says there's no evidence thatgays
>are any more promiscuous than heterosexuals. I'd like to see some
>documentation, because I've seen dozens of figures that show that
>anybody who doesn't believe gays as a groups are more promiscuous (
>meaning number of sexual partners) is just plain ignorant.
Command: 
>

>The median number of partners of 22 year old men in bars at the SF
>young mens study was something like 20. It is widely acknowledged taht
>the AIDS epidemic was caused largely by large numbers of partners 
>combined with anal unproteced sex (Is there anybody out there who
>will knowledgeably dispute this) and the much lower rate of new
>gay AIDS cases is largely due to a changes in behavior. The fact
>that younger gays are still getting AIDS shows that promiscuity is
>still a problem in this sector.  In the DEc 22 NewEngland Journal of
>Medicine shows that a survey of adults in the US puts the mean number 
Command: 
>of sexual partners for women is 3.3. Among college women, only 21
>percent reported 6 or more partners. Suveys by Rand in LA, and the
>SF drug abuse study also uphold the high number of partners and drug
>use. There was a 1988 book called "ground zero" which has an entire
>chapter on promiscuity, and why it is a central feature of gay identity.
>
>I'm a bit curious why this gay man didn't have problems with equating
>sex with death and openly advocating celibacy, and openly admitting the
>causes of the AIDS epidemic, while the party soc.motss line is that
>gays are not promiscuous, and AIDS doesn't afflict gays more than any
>other group, and there is no risk in multiple partners as long as
>condoms are used.
>
>Another figure, only 0.3% of women with 1 partner were HIV+, compared
>to 12.4% of those with 5+ partners. 11% of those with first intercourse
>< 13 were HIV+ vs. 0.8% of those >20 at first intercourse. 14% of
>those with 3 or more fathers of children were HIV+ compared to 
>just 2.3% with just one father. Women who used condoms had a higher
>HIV rate than those who did not. This parallels the YoungMens survey
>figures which were supressed that showed a similar connection between
>number of partners and HIV+. Is there anybody out there who disputes
>this connection? 
>
>Just how many soc.motss folks have had 3 partners or less? How many
>hetero-folk? Why doesn't somebody just do a survey?

---------------------
1. From: rdonahue@ursa-major.spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
        This post is inappropriate for the *.motss newsgroups.
-------------------------------------
2. From: deacon@ihlpe.att.com
Promiscuity is a relative term.  "Promiscuity" is only bad for people
who value monogamy, for those who exploit others, or those who practice
unsafe sex.
People who have healthy sex-positive attitudes have nothing to justify
to sexphobes.
Regardless, I don't know of any study such as you suggest has been done.
------------------------------
3. 1/14/93 09:57 97/4405 pgr@crhc.uiuc.edu (Paul Ryan)
How does one document a lack of evidence?  If you have preconceived 
notions about gays, they remain notions until you back them up.  They
are NOT true until we document disproof.

I have seen no half dozen pieces of evidence, nor have I seen a dozen
pieces of evidence.

I have seen one half-remembered story about a survey, which I refuted by
pointing out that you would get similarly skewed results in a straight
meat-market bar survey of 22 year old men, because 22 year old San Franciscan
men do NOT represent gay men as a whole.

Would you care to repeat your other 5 peices of evidence?

-----------------------

4. >Mr. Michael Adams Starcad@uiuc.edu says there's no evidence that gays
>are any more promiscuous than heterosexuals. I'd like to see some
>documentation. 

------------------------
5. From: shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore)
Organization: Cornell Theory Center

This article is inappropriate for soc.motss.  Please
limit such postings to more appropriate newsgroups.

>... how to you document a lack of evidence... 
>
>Hey, I just gave you a half dozen pieces of evidence, none of it 
>challenged. So if I give you a dozen pieces of evidence that gays
>are promiscuous relative to heterosexuals, and you don't accept it,
>and you provide no evidence that it is the same, is this evidence
>that gays simply believe they are not promiscuous on the basis of
>no evidence at all? (I think that's the case here, as it is with 10%
>becuase no matter how may people post how many surveys that show it
>isn't 10, and nobody can show a study other than the faulty Kinsey
>40's study, no homo-folks seems to be able to admit that 10% is wrong)
>
Command: 
>Arthur Hu, the man who obviously knows nothing about statistics, vs.
>soc.motss where everyone believes gays are not more promiscous, and that
>10% of everybody is gay, no matter that there is no supporting evidence,
>or the overwhelming weight of evidence to the contrary.
---------------------------------------

From: Michael S Ritchie <mritchie@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
6.No one is challenging you because no one needs to prove anything
to you, you tired old asshole.  Get the fuck off our newsgroup
and go post to alt.homophobic.

---------------------------------------
7. From: Michael Bryan <michael@resonex.com>
Why don't you just grow up?
I really pity you.  How horrible it must be to have such a twisted,
sick mind, so incredibly bent on misusing statistics to "prove" that
your grotesque non-understanding of AIDS is the gospel truth.
I just hope that your ignorance doesn't lead you or any of your
loved ones into contracting AIDS.  That would be even more tragic
than you are, Arthur.
--------------------------
8. From: rdonahue@ursa-major.spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
        This post is inappropriate for the *.motss newsgroups.
Additional information is available in the FAQ for the group
-------------------------
9. From: Jess Anderson <anderson@macc.wisc.edu>
--------------------------------
10. >Well, it's half-way through the week, and nobody can document any statistics
>that gays as a group have fewer sexual partners than heterosexuals. We do hav
>a few people who have few partners, but that's not a controlled study.

..which means that your study is inconclusive.  Failing to disprove a
premise does NOT make it true.  (i.e.  I believe there is a planet Xylon
where gelatinous creatures leave.  If you fail to prove that it doesn't
exist, then it does???)

Rocky Giovinazzo
giovinaz@icarus.hks.com
---------------------
11. Received: from LEO.BSUVC.BSU.EDU by LEO.BSUVC.BSU.EDU (PMDF #3154 )
  id<01GTMX786BLI96VME6@^EO.BSUVS RU.EDU>; SunX
  CAME?"<00BBHARRIS@leo.bsuvc.BSU.EDU>

I'm an 18-year old virgin, and i personally know 17 others LesBiGays
who are between the ages of 18-23 who are the same.   
Brandon
PS- Just thought i'd let u know.... 8-)
---------------------
12. 1/17/93 20:10 Tim Pierce <twpierce@unix.amherst.edu>
You posted this article to soc.motss.  Please take your discussion to
a more appropriate newsgroup.
------------------------
13. 1/18/93 07:34 "The Dreamer" <ASG102@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
     Gay promiscuity was the only point that I wasn't asking for proof about.
I want to know what studies have come up with a cure for homosexuality or that
heterosexual people are not at risk for ADIS.
     As it is now, I KNOW I'm standing on zero evidence asside from my own
personal experiences.  Until I am convinced either way, I will continue to
look at both sides of the argument as objectively as possible.
---------------
14.1/21/93 00:01 rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese)
In article <74041@cup.portal.com> you write:
>Hey, if promiscuity isn't bad, why bother denying it?

Sex with multiple partners is not bad.  "Promiscuity" is a term in American 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
English which bears negative connotations.  So to acknowledge promiscuity
in American English is to acknowledge something bad.  It's like the difference
between killing and murder: all killing is not a crime, but all murder is.
-- 
ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                              +1 415 ALL-ARFF
----------------------
15.1/21/93 20:34 tachyon@cats.UCSC.EDU
Would you please find some other way to get your jollies than by
treating soc.motss as if it were some kind of 900 number for you to
call to ask people about their sex lives? 

---------------------
16.1/22/93 12:36 paul@psych.toronto.edu
>Hey, if promiscuity isn't bad, why bother denying it? Can't have it both ways
Command: 
>Either it's good, and you should have lots of it, or it's bad and there's
>a limit to how much you should have.

Or, as is the case with most things in life, it is neither good nor bad and
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
whether one chooses to be promiscuous or not
will depend on the proclivities of that individual.  Quit arguing from
the black and white.  There are many shades.

-paul