Bill Weintraub:

Thank you Professor Gale.

This is one time we truly are glad we have the professor here to explain these things to us.

Particularly since

Sex survey researchers say they know that Dr. Gale is correct. Men and women in a population must have roughly equal numbers of partners.

The sex surveyors know Dr. Gale is correct.

Yet for some reason they haven't bothered to tell us.

I wonder why?

Perhaps because it would invalidate their surveys.

You see the problem.

As Greg Milliken points out in Modern Promiscuity,

The second quip that analists love to use on naive young men (or they did when I was a naive young man at any rate) is that guys are naturally promiscuous. Is this true? Possibly. Is it historically evident? Perhaps. But it fails to take into account something that is historically proven: guys are particularly selective.

Modern promiscuity leaves this fact behind. Instead of having multiple partners that meet a selective set of criteria, today's man is supposed to want any above-average piece of ass thrown at him. Gag me. This portrayal shows men as out-of-control hedonistic dimwits.

So -- both Greg and Ms Kolata point out that we're told over and over again that "men are naturally promiscuous."

And our beloved gay male subculture, aka analism, whose business interests are dependent upon promiscuity for their money, reinforces that idea at every turn.

Yet, as Dr Gale demonstrates, the idea is false.

It depends upon a dichotomy between male and female behavior which cannot be justified mathematically.

And the effect of that false dichotomy is to shame both men and women.

And to become a "self-fulfilling prophecy."

Now -- what does that have to do with us?

Well, as I've discussed in two recent posts, To see masculinity and masculine love as sacred and The Deification of Antinous, it's long been clear to me that a close reading of the historical record tells us that historically, Men who Love Men have been FAITHFUL to their male lovers.

That they haven't been promiscuous with other men -- at all.

An observation my foreign friend shared in Are some men naturally macho:

As a rule a masculine-identified man, is likely to go for feminine- identified females and masculine-identified males. His interest in the female is generally periodical and short-lived, whether or not it is intense. Furthermore he is more likely to go for any female without showing much preference (i.e. indiscriminately). In other words he is not likely to be particular about the female he choses to sleep with --- except that she is feminine, soft and submissive. There is not much chance of a desire for emotional attachment with the female though. In fact that is what a masculine-identified male is really afraid of.

His interest in a male bond is however likely to be long term --- even lifelong, emotional and monogamous (as far as nature is concerned). He is also likely to be very choosy in his choice of a male partner.

In other words masculine-identified men are promiscuous with regard to women, but monogamous vis a vis men.

[emphases mine]

So says my foreign friend.

And I certainly agree with him about Men Loving Men.

But the truth is that, speaking historically, we don't even know how promiscuous the average man was with women.

As we saw in Men, War, Promiscuity, Affluence, and AIDS, promiscuity is to some degree -- actually a large degree -- a function of affluence.

People who are dirt poor -- as most people have been throughout the history of the race -- simply can't afford to be promiscuous.

We also saw, in that same post, that studies of conflicts in Africa reveal that Men at War tended not to be promiscuous either.

That finding is counter-intuitive, since we tend to associate war with rape.

And rape certainly is a reality of war.

But rape is an act most often carried out by a victorious army.

Most of the time that Men are at war, however, they're not victorious.

They're either hanging out, waiting to fight, or in battle.

And when they're hanging out and / or preparing to fight, it's very common for Men to practice chastity -- at least, as we saw with MEND, with women.

That is, Men commonly foreswear sex with women in order to gain what they think of as some advantage -- magical or otherwise -- in the forthcoming fight.

Plus, it's not unusual for guys in the fight sports, like boxers, or other athletes -- to do the same.

Further, we see when we look at the historical record -- and here I'm talking about Greece and Rome -- that most Men are not described as promiscuous with women.

Indeed, as I've often pointed out, the Romans associated "womanizing" with effeminacy.

They thought that a man who spent too much time in the pursuit and company of women, would become "mollis" -- soft or effeminate.

So whereas in our society, what Redd has very aptly called "heterosexism's script" requires that Men at least pretend to be promiscuous with women, neither the Greeks nor the Romans would have approved.

As a matter of fact, what we often see, as we do with an historical figure like Pelopidas, are men who love their wives and who are faithful to their male lovers.

In addition, there's the question of opportunity.

Women in ancient societies were very restricted.

If it takes two to tango, as Dr Gale points out, it would have been difficult for men to be promiscuous with women.

Of course there were slaves and prostitutes.

But there still had to be, as I'm sure Dr Gale would note, some degree of gender parity.

And though these were, in theory, "patriarchal" societies, there were still many restraints on male behavior.

That's not to say that either historically, or in the here and now, Men were or are never promiscuous.

But it is to say, as Dr Gale points out of our present-day sex surveys, that

when such data are published, with no asterisk next to them saying they can't be true, they just "reinforce the stereotypes of promiscuous males and chaste females."

In fact, he added, the survey data themselves may be part of the problem. If asked, a man, believing that he should have a lot of partners, may feel compelled to exaggerate, and a woman, believing that she should have few partners, may minimize her past.

"In this way," Dr. Gale said, "the false conclusions people draw from these surveys may have a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy."

A self-fulfilling prophecy indeed.

And nowhere is this prophecy more self-fulfilling than among gay-identified men, who are told constantly and without cease that men are "naturally promiscuous," and that those gay men who aren't promiscuous are "sexually-repressed prudes" who are "missing out on the fun."

If you're gay-identified, chances are very great you've heard that.

Because there's ENORMOUS subcultural and peer pressure among gay-identified males to be promiscuous.

What's more, whereas in the past men simply boasted of their conquests -- which may or may not have been real -- the advent of the internet and of the huge gay hookup sites has enabled the culture to mathematically and precisely tell anyone who happens to log on just how many "contacts" a "user" has had.

We saw that very clearly in The Metrics of Analism, where profiles on one of the big sites carry this sort of information:

SkinBottom

No position given

Users who know SkinBottom personally

# A total of 67 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 2754 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

Bigballs

Position Top only

Users who know Bigballs personally

# A total of 73 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 3148 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

Sexton

Position Top & Bottom

Users who know Sexton personally

# A total of 98 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 3746 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

SneakerFist

No position given

Users who know SneakerFist personally

# A total of 100 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 3893 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

fister

No position given -- he appears to be a bottom for fisting

Users who know fister personally

# A total of 116 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 3802 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

skin-biker

Position Top & Bottom

Users who know skin-biker personally

# A total of 129 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 4460 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

buttrose

Position More top

Users who know buttrose personally

# A total of 149 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 4159 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

Guy80

Position More top

Users who know Guy80 personally

# A total of 167 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 5549 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

---

Hooligan

Position Top only

Users who know Hooligan personally

# A total of 199 users have saved him and marked him as known personally. These users themselves are stored by 5661 other users as known personally. So we can say that the user is really genuine.

So:

A guy like Hooligan, whose picture of course is on his profile, has had at a minimum 199 verifiable partners.

Those partners in turn are "known to" -- and this is one case in which "known" definitely does mean in the Biblical sense -- 5661 other "users."

Talk about concurrency!

And remember, those 199 verifiable partners are just from this one site alone.

That doesn't include males Hooligan may have met on other sites, or in bars, at bath-houses, at raves, etc.

So: gay-identified men are told over and over and over again that they're not living if they're not promiscuous.

And the metrics of the big internet hook-up sites now back that up.

But does quantity indicate quality?

Of course not.

And I cannot emphasize too strongly -- because I think this is much neglected -- that hookup sites are businesses.

They are dot coms.

They exist to make money.

And the only way they can make money is through promiscuity.

There's no other way to do it.

And that's true throughout the gay community.

Of course a businessperson can make money through an ordinary transaction with a gay-identified male -- such as selling him a car.

But there's nothing "gay" about that transaction after all.

It has nothing -- or very little -- to do with sex.

Whereas the only function of the hookup sites -- and of the bars, the bathhouses, the sex-clubs, the raves, the many tourist locales -- is to enable men to have multiple partners.

Guys don't go to those places for the conversation.

Or the scenery.

They go because of the sex.

Because of the possibility of having many, many partners.

As we saw with the OUTgames, as many as two or three per night.

AND THAT IS WHY YOU DON'T SEE A TRUE PUSH FOR FIDELITY WITHIN GAY CULTURE.

Because it doesn't pay.

But the historic reality of Men who Love Men is that such Men were FAITHFUL.

And that, as we've seen over and over again, a culture based on promiscuity soon turns murderous and predatory.

As I've said before, only the Warrior can stop the predator.

The Warrior, and the Warrior Ethos, which is austere, affiliative, and aggressive.

What does that mean?

Affiliative of course means that the Warrior bonds with his fellow warriors.

Aggressive means that the Warrior, when attacked, is appropriately aggressive.

And austere means that the Warrior lives simply, and faithfully.

That he is Faithful to his Warrior Brother -- the Man He Loves.

We call the Love of Warrior for Warrior -- Heroic Love.

And we know -- not just from History but from our own experience -- that such love is the purest and strongest in the world.

As I said in The Deification of Antinous:

Heroic Love -- the Love of Man for Man and Warrior for Warrior -- is the strongest and purest in the world.

So far as I can tell, every human culture -- except our own -- has recognized that fact.

Mankind's salvation lies in and only in the return to the WARRIOR values of Phallus Fidelity and Masculinity -- as expressed in the HEROIC LOVE OF MAN FOR MAN.

One of the male's primary life tasks -- is to have that Heroic Love in his life.

Without it, the male never becomes the MAN he was born to be.

HEROIC LOVE is yours by right of birth.

Don't run from it.

Seek it, seize it, treasure it.

So:

We've all been told that Fidelity between Men is a myth.

That it's not possible.

Suppose that's just one more heterosexualized lie.

And that the Truth is -- that promiscuity is a lie.

And Fidelity the Truth.

What then?

Would it not be a shame to go through your entire life --

living someone else's lie --

rather than your own sweet and precious Truth?

Bill Weintraub

August 17, 2007

© All material Copyright 2007 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.