I have two sources to make me believe that gay men live shorter. Is this true as if it is I hate being gay. And by the way don't be afraid to say the truth because you don't want to crush me. Here are my sources that raised my fear. "Actually they do have a shorter life span. Having sex in the anal region causes bleeding and infections and VD and Herpes virus which is spread more in the homosexual community. Basically because they have more sex than the rest of us. More oral sex which again brings us to a very putrid environment. Silvia in the mouth will digest meat, yet you are putting very delicate organs in there. Which goes up the ureter into the bladder and kidney. A lot of poison in that area is swallowed. So they get poisoned more than the rest of us. Why they say wash your hands after visiting the tiolet, yet your mouth is there. They have to take iron tablets, get peritonitis, they take large does of antibiotics and other pills for VD constantly looseing blood in the rectum. It is a very dangerous life style even if they do not get AIDS. when a man and woman have regular sex it does not involve feces. Which is all the refuse from the body and on its way out of the body. Even a small amount under a fingernail or left on the hand can cause horrible stomach poisoning. Homosexual men are usually frequent in a hospital, during their life." "In 2005, over half of new HIV infections diagnosed in the US were among gay men, and up to one in five gay men living in cities is thought to be HIV positive. Yet two large population surveys showed that most gay men had similar numbers of unprotected sexual partners per year as straight men and women. US researchers applied a series of carefully calculated equations in different scenarios to study the rate at which HIV infection has spread among gay men and straight men and women. They used figures taken from two national surveys to estimate how many sex partners gay men and straight men and women have, and what proportion of gay men have insertive or receptive anal sex, or both. They then set these figures against accepted estimates of how easily HIV is transmitted by vaginal and anal sex to calculate the size of the HIV epidemic in gay men and straight men and women. The results showed that for the straight US population to experience an epidemic of HIV infection as great as that of gay men, they would need to average almost five unprotected sexual partners every year. This is a rate almost three times that of gay men. But to end the HIV epidemic, gay men would need to have rates of unprotected sex several times lower than those currently evident among the straight population. This is because transmission rates are higher for anal sex than they are for vaginal sex, say the authors. But "role versatility," whereby people adopt both "insertive" and "receptive roles," also plays a part, they add. A gay man can be easily infected through unprotected receptive sex, and then infect someone else through insertive sex. Gay men are therefore far more susceptible to the spread of the virus through the population, even with the same numbers of unprotected sexual partners. We have to keep in mind that as the word gay relates to both males and females, the articles don't qualify or say what % of gays by gender have a lower mortality than non gays. I don't know what the average life expectancy for female gays is, but maybe someone else can look into that." And sorry about the long thread. Thank You, Gay1234
Sounds more like homophobic agenda than a valid 'source'. First, they are correct in the sense that anal sex does have a much higher HIV rate than other sex acts, and that gay men were infected more because of this. But as long as you use condoms (EVERY single time) and make sure you are clean, the risk isn't nearly as high. But even with the risks, this is just overexaggerated to spread homophobia and scare gay men. Especially with the criticism of the oral sex in the first paragraph. Straight men get more blowjobs than anyone else I know, and they aren't 'poisoned'. It's simply an illogical argument
First off, while you've included quotations, you haven't said where they are from, which is what citing a source would involve. So it's impossible to get any sense of where these statements are coming from and how much (if any) credibility they have or how unbiased (or not) the authors are. Moving on to the specific points raised, I suspect the bullshit quotient is running high here. Let's see...just going off the top of my head and my own personal experience since I'm short on time ATM and don't have th option of research.. 1) Saliva...actually it is stomach acid that dissolves food, not saliva. Tooth decay arises from bacteria in the mouth breaking down food particles, not from saliva dissolving teeth. Also, if this were true, why doesn't your tongue or the inside of your mouth get dissolve? Why don't women's nipples get dissolved from breastfeeding? Basically I'm thinking this is either total BS or is vastly exaggerating a case (eg, you'd need to hold a penis in your mouth for months at a time or longer for there to be ill effects. 2) Oral sex - first, straight people engage in oral sex all the time, generally without ill effect. There are some STDs that can be transmitted orally, but they don't care what your orientation is and can effect straights as readily as gays. 3) Gay people have more sex than 'we' do. - while some gay men have hundreds of partners, others have nowhere near that many and many gay men are monogamous. Many straight people are also quite promiscuous. Having lots and lots of unprotected or the raise unsafe sex does increase the chances of catching something, but there is a significant social effort in the gay community to curtail that and this ultimately comes down to a combo of personal choice (you can choose to only engage in safe sex, you can choose how am any and what kind of sex partners you have, etc.). Note also, that for quite some time society disdained and discouraged same sex relationships and might therefore be argued to be partly at fault for fostering a social climate that discouraged young gay men from forming stable relationships rather than engaging in lots of hookups. I also don't believe foe a moment that straight people are as chaste as these statements imply. 4) Health - I was in a three year relationship that involved bottoming anal sex every night. I routinely have engaged in oral sex in every relationship I've been in (about 13 guys IIRC, so no hundreds of partners here, although I have a friend who has had that). My husband and I have been together nearly 20yrs and I have been sexually active as a gay man since age 19. In all that time, I have never needed to take any of the pills or meds that are mentioned, nor do I know anyone who has needed to, including my friend who's had sex with hundreds of guys. I get a cold about once a year. My husband (who is 13yrs older than me and also doesn't take any of he meds mentioned) also only gets a cold once or twice a year. Neither of us have ever been to the hospital for anything relating to our sexuality. 5) Finally, a bit of googling turned up mention of the claim that gay men have shorter lifespans. The short version is that the 'research'on this was done with an agenda and has been roundly rejected by the mainstream scientific community. I'd post links but on an iPad and it's a pain. Google is your friend in this case. Speaking for myself, I know plenty of gay men in their 70s and 80s or beyond and they are all doing fine beyond the normal health effects associated with such ages and which also afflict straight people. Long story short, as long as you practice safe sex and common sense, there is no reason that being gay should negatively impact your lifespan. Hope this helps, Todd
See above, bro. I really wouldn't worry about it, these sources sound like utter bullshit. Just remember to always be safe when it comes to sex, and never be afraid to get both yourself and your partner checked out on a relatively regular basis. - Leo
Wow thanks for that informative long answer. The sources came from a yahoo answers question. That makes me feel so much better. Thank You so much.
I would generally advise that Yahoo Answers is a totally worthless source of information that I wouldn't trust to tell me the color of the sky, let alone provide answers on any subject of any depth or complexity. I'd suggest avoiding it moving forward. Glad I could help Todd
