EL> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002 bitbitch@magnesium.net wrote:
>> So Eugen, how many of your homo friends have -had- 3k lovers?
EL> Just one. Not everybody does that. Most of them are now dead, anyway.
Point is, you're not likely to extrapolate much.  I could probably
find one hetero who had just as much sex.   Does that mean we're all
rampant hos?  No.
>> Eegads, if you're hypothesizing numbers like -that- Eugen, you at
>> least owe it to FoRK to back that shit up.
EL> Ain't done no hypothesizing. Anecdotal evidence'R'Us. Couldn't you just
EL> Google, or something?
Listen.  If you pull numbers like that without a fact, the automagic
assumption is yes, they were extracted out of your neither orifice.
Point wasn't to conclude otherwise unless you had any relevant bits.
Its not my job to do _your_ bit searching for you, but I figured I'd
humor fork with this bit of finding:
http://www.thebody.com/bp/apr01/research_notebook.html  (Pointing ot
averages of about 13 for every 3 months (for gay men), which totals to
about  52 a year.  52 a year doesn't equal 3000.   Or even 300.
>> Just a quick assumption here.   I'm not a math geek or anything, but
>> assuming 1 lover every day, that would be like at least one lover
>> everyday for 8 years and some change.   I don't know about you, but
>> very very few of us are -that- lucky (or even close to that lucky)
EL> Which was my point. Gurls don't do hyperpromiscuity as a life style. It's
EL> interesting that you're launching into a diatribe, and threaten using
EL> instant argument (just add hominem) instead of assuming I might be not
EL> just pulling this whole thing out my nether orifice.
WTF do my shitty math skillz have to do with girls and
hyperpromiscuity?  I was speaking -generally- meaning that guys and
girls probably have better things to do than boink everything they
see.  As above, I am assuming you're pulling things out of your ass, I
just felt like calling you on it.
BTW, there's nothing wrong with calling someone on a silly idea.  Its
allowed, and its generally not considered ad hominem, but the
homophobia statement might be.
>> and after awhile, even the sexaholics get bored and have to mingle
>> something new into their weekends.   You really are assumiing that the
>> homosexual population is a) that large in a given area (The meccas
EL> You ever been to San Francisco?
Many times.  Which is why I said 'assuming that large ... (The meccas
dont count).  SF is a mecca in this example.  I obviously wasn't
clear, tho one could assume I wasn't talking about Medina.
>> a few nifty gaybars, but thats a different story)  b) that bored/sex
>> obsessed/recreationally free to pursue sex that often, with that many
>> partners or that they'd even WANT that many partners.
EL> This doesn't happen because it couldn't happen. No one would want to.
EL> Because you feel that way. Correct?
doesn't happen?  true.   Couldn't happen?  who knows.   It has nothing
to do with how I 'feel' and everything to do with the fact that people
do concern themselves with more than just sex (otherwise I think we'd
see a helluva lot more of sex, and a helluva lot less of everything
else).
>> Qualify yourself, or at least lower your outrageous numbers.
EL> I didn't expect so much reflexive knee-jerking on this list.
Well my suggestion is, if you can't take the responses, don't post
flamebait.
--
Best regards,
bitbitch                            mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net