Bisexuals are not more likely to be promiscuous.

Post Reply New Topic

I've heard that bisexuals will always be promiscuous because they will always be thinking about the other sex than that they are in a relationship with. To me, that is like sayingterosexuals will always be promiscuous because they will always be thinking about other people of the opposite sex or homosexuals will always be promiscuous because they will always be thinking about other people of the same sex.

To me, the statement that bisexuals are more likely to be promiscuous is just stupid.

Stupid or not, the rate of AIDS among the LGBT population is higher than among the hetero-sexual population - as much as 60 times higher, depending on which source is cited (too many to list here).

AIDS is a disease of promiscuity, needle sharing, and blood contamination.

So either the LGBT population is more promiscuous, or its members tend to share more infected needles, or they receive more contaminated blood transfusions than hetero-sexuals.

Which is it?

Based on the ones I've known, they tend to be completely reckless. Promiscuous would be an understatement. Whenever I heard about what they were doing, I always wished I hadn't.

Actually, the higher rate of infection does not carry through to all of the LGBT population (for example, the rate of infection for lesbian women is lower than the rate for heterosexual women) and is still higher for gay men even when number of sexual partners is a value adjusted. It is hypothesized to occur because of the more dangerous nature of anal sex (increased tearing).

Of course, rates of drug use are higher across the LGBT spectrum than they are for the heterosexual population as well.

But I agree with the above poster about bisexuals being reckless. I think true bisexuality is far rarer than the identity crisis that seems to be fueling many of them.

I think it all depends on the person.

A thing I thought of though, is it possible that there are higher infection rates in males because of less use of condoms as there is no risk of pregnancy? Thus the things that a condom would offer some protection from, due to there being no pregnancy risk, could be more often present?

actually, the transmission route is easiest through male to male sexual contact than it is for heterosexual intercourse. That's why the incidence of HIV/AIDS is higher among gay men.

Apparently, promiscuity IS the deciding factor.

well, yeah...

although it does preclude the incidence of IV drug use and needle sharing.

There are lots of factors involved in the higher prevalence of HIV among gay/bisexual men:
- Substance misuse is higher (especially alcohol and meth). Using needles increases the risk of catching HIV. Being drunk prevents people from judging risk properly and leads to less safe sex.
- Discrimination is higher. Men are less likely to admit that they have sex with other men, so they don't get tested for STDs and they don't get decent sexual health advice.
- There is already a high prevalence of HIV among gay/bisexual men. This means that there is a higher risk of exposure to HIV for a gay/bisexual man, even if they have the same number of sexual encounters as a straight man. It's a bit like people with freckles being more likely to get burnt, even if they go out in the sun the same amount as everybody else.

The main problem is discrimination. If gay and bisexual men were discriminated against less, they would be less likely to develop mental health problems or get kicked out of their homes, which means that they would be less likely to turn to drugs. They would also feel safer getting tested for STDs and seeking sexual health advice.

Promiscuity is high among some sub-populations of gay and bisexual men (just as it is among straight men and women who go dogging). But it's not a universal feature.

Man, I love living the bi life. I find that AIDS-infected blood really helps to wash down the dead baby you eat, after participating in a drug-fuelled orgy.*

Going back to the topic, bis aren't more likely to be promiscuous by virtue of being bi. I agree with Indy that a certain subsect of the LGBT community engages in more self-destructive behaviour, largely because of discrimination.

*This is scarcasm, in case I get into trouble...

I known some who use bisexuality as an excuse to be with two people at a time

Just because some do that doesn't mean we all are like that. When I've been in relationships, I have always been faithful with the other person.

Of coarse your not all like that but lots I see are & those are the ones giving bisexuality a bad rep

Why should bisexuals need to be ambassadors for their sexuality? People who want to be promiscuous are going to do it anyway. They're not going to think, 'this gives other people who share my sexuality a bad rep'. It's not like straight people think about that before they have affairs. No-one says, 'that Bill Clinton gives heteros a bad rep'.

It's the way they use bisexuality as an excuse that ticks me off. Bill Clinton never used heterosexuality as his excuse to have affairs. Some bisexuals claim that they need to be with a man & women to satisfy their bisexual needs. I suspect some are probably mostly gay or straight but using bisexuality so they can have an excuse to be in a relationship with two people.

I don't think you need an excuse to be in a relationship with two people in the 21st century. Surely it's theirs and their partners' business?