Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Baptist Press jumps on the “lack of gay monogamy” bandwagon

Timothy Kincaid

February 10th, 2010

As expected, the irresponsible coverage of SF State University’s gay couples study by the New York Times continues to be trumpeted on anti-gay media. Today the Baptist Press picked up the story and ran with

Study showing lack of gay monogamy could impact nation’s marriage debate

About half of all male homosexual couples have sex outside of the relationship with the approval of the partner, according to a new study out of San Francisco that some say should have a dramatic impact on the nation’s debate over “gay marriage.”

Anti-gay activists are ready and willing to extrapolate from “couples” to “gay marriage” without even blushing.

“The study demonstrates clearly what we’ve been arguing: That gays bring a different definition to marriage,” Glenn T. Stanton, a sociologist who is the director for family formation studies at Focus on the Family, told Baptist Press. “And it’s not just a different definition that male and female become optional, but that monogamy becomes optional as well. They are coming into marriage with a wholly different view of marriage than anybody has — left, right, conservative, liberal…. They come in with that understanding of openness. These are people who come into marriage with a wholly different and really radical definition of what marriage is about.”

You can bet Stanton will use this as his leading point in his debates from now on.

(The claims made about the study are false. It does not show that “half of all male homosexual couples have sex outside of the relationship with the approval of the partner”.)

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

Burr
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

Heterosexuals don’t really believe in monogamy either. Just look at all the adultery scandals in the news.

At least these open couples aren’t lying about it to each other.

Richard W. Fitch
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

My guess is that if the same type of sampling (ages, length of relationship, geographic, education, income, etc) were done for M-F couples, the results would be very similar; especially for younger couples and short-term relationships.

Ben in Oakland
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

According to two very reliable studies, 25% to 30% of heterosexual MARRIAGES are adulterous– not just relationships.

There isn’t that beig of a difference, even if they were comparing apples to apples.

Daniel
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

We will not win any battles trying to woo folks over with open marriage. 88% of Americans find adultery to be wrong.

And talk about communication skills and “arrangements” might bring that number down a bit, but it is pushing a boulder that much further up the hill to try to win the marriage equality bill with this study.

Timothy Kincaid
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

Daniel,

It seems I erred in not noting that the study does not by any means back up the misinformation attributed to it.

The problem is not the study. It’s the bogus coverage of the study.

Rob in San diego
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

Why is it when heterosexual cheats, they are not banned from ever getting married again. And what ever happened to putting that Scarlett letter on them?

Marlene
February 10th, 2010 | LINK

Since when would a “news” organization like the Baptist Press would care about telling the truth?

I *swear* these fascists think the Commandment about bearing false witness is suspended when it comes to telling lies about the TLBG community!!

werdna
February 11th, 2010 | LINK

Only one “g” in “bandwagon”. Otherwise, fine job of catching lying liars in the act.

OTOH, I can’t disagree with the BP’s headline, this study will likely impact the marriage debate, if only because bigots will continue to misrepresent the findings as long as they can get away with it.

anteros
February 11th, 2010 | LINK

Sometimes I wonder…

If, and a big if, it were true that homosexual couples are less monogamous than heterosexual couples…

Wouldn’t homosexual couples become more monogamous if same sex marriage was afforded the same social, cultural and legal status as heterosexual marriage?

How much has the absence of the marriage option impacted monogamous gay dating, courtship… and gay relationships and culture in general?

Would there be as many monogamous heterosexual couples if the concept of heterosexual marriage was not socially, culturally and legally well-defined and encouraged?

Wouldn’t gay marriage encourage monogamy for gay couples just as heterosexual marriage encourages monogamy for straight couples?

anteros
February 11th, 2010 | LINK

Are they suggesting, that because some gay couples opt for open relationships, allowing gay people to get married will re-define marriage for everybody and encourage more heterosexual couples to opt for open relationships?

That argument is flawed on so many levels… I’m too disgusted to break it down for anybody who can’t see the stupidity of that argument.

klaus
February 11th, 2010 | LINK

if the definition of marriage was really based mainly on sexual exclusiveness, then it would be a GOOD thing to change this stupid, one-sided definition.

somehow it is funny to see how those people who pretend to talk about social values are so obsessed with the importance of sex – and seem to forget or at least minimize the “social”.

David Weintraub
February 11th, 2010 | LINK

And this “new definition” would be what, now? The inclusion of honesty and negotiation?

Just saying.

Regan DuCasse
February 11th, 2010 | LINK

“Half of all…” from a group of 500 odd couples is hardly representative of ALL gay male couples period.

That’s not even a fraction of the percentile.
And of course, in as many hetero couples as has been stated already, there likely ARE similar numbers that could EASILY be found in SF as well.

Of course this sampling wasn’t COMPARED to hetero couples.

And if they were, then that would be evidence that gay AND straight heteros tend to do similar things in their sex lives, so therefore no cause for discrimination to either group.

However, I’m really tired of all this ‘research and study’ of gay lives. The scrutiny is ridiculously intense and I think by now, completely unnecessary.
The anti gay don’t want to spend any money on anything like this themselves that would be broad and involve the long term or a wide spectrum of sample subjects.
They can’t be bothered to do the simplest thing, like actually HAVING gay friends, family and colleagues to inform them of who and what gay folks are and their needs.

So lobbing from a distance, extrapolating the narrowest of information from a small sample is enough for them to infer something without any evidence.

There is no reason anymore for gay people to have to be submitted or examined like this.
There doesn’t have to be a year to research what the affects of repealing DADT would be.

There is no need to look at the ‘Swedish study’, but bigger countries like Canada, which shares a great deal of similar values and economic and social strata.
Or the state of MA.

This is no longer an ‘experiment’ but stalling and delays and more excessive demands on the patience of gays and lesbians.

And unless, when ANY of these research articles come out, there is an equal and similar sample of heteros AS WELL, for comparison, I can and will assume that these researchers weren’t the least bit interested in comprehensive study whatsoever.

They seem to be of limited substance anyway, and might as well have not bothered.

I’m curious about how many gay people can or are willing to be counted for the census. Just trying to figure out how many there are and where, is elusive enough.
And the real numbers of gay people out there is certainly disputed by anti gay factions.

What a shame that something so basic is difficult to obtain, but somehow things like this research that picque the prurient interests of the anti gay are much easier to come by.

Marlene
February 15th, 2010 | LINK

Let’s not forget that in the TVC’s propaganda film “Gay Rights, Special Rights”, a self-appointed “expert” used highly suspect data from a survey made decades earlier from a VD clinic.

He made these wild, unsubstantiated claims that the average gay male drank gallons of urine, ate so many pounds of feces, and had thousands of anonymous sexual partners!

So watch for the religious reicht to spew their perverted take on this survey on every religious program they can lay their dirty fingers on!

Jason D
February 15th, 2010 | LINK

I don’t think I’ve met a thousand people in my life.

Let alone a thousand gay men.

Let alone a thousand gay men that I find attractive, that also find me attractive, and both of us happen to be available for sex.

I can’t imagine how that could happen. Makes me wonder if their standards are low, or if they never spend any time at home or have any other hobbies, or if they just have an orgy weekend every few months.

I know we’re mentioning phoney “research”, but I’ve met folks who claim to have numbers that high.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.