New study: homosexual men promiscuous -42.9% in Chicago Shoreland Area had 60 partners

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--A new study by a group of University of Chicago researchers reveals a high level of promiscuity and unhealthy behavior among that city's homosexual male population.

According to the researchers, 42.9 percent of homosexual men in Chicago's Shoreland area have had more than 60 sexual partners, while an additional 18.4 percent have had between 31 and 60 partners. All total, 61.3 percent of the area's homosexual men have had more than 30 partners, and 87.8 percent have had more than 15, the research found.

As a result, 55.1 percent of homosexual males in Shoreland -- known as Chicago's "gay center" -- have at least one sexually transmitted disease, researchers said.

The three-year study on the sexual habits of Chicago's citizens will appear in the upcoming book, "The Sexual Organization of The City" (University of Chicago Press), due out this spring.

The researchers interviewed 2,114 people from throughout the city and its suburbs, asking them detailed questions about their sexual behavior and beliefs.

While the research dealt with the behavior of all people -- heterosexuals included -- its findings on homosexual men are sure to raise eyebrows.

"Informants from several institutional spheres noted the common expectation among white gay men of having multiple sex partners," researchers wrote. "Ads for gay bars and clubs convey the message that being gay is about having sexual encounters, not relationships.... The majority of personal ads in city papers under the headline 'men seeking men' identify casual sex rather than long-term relationships as their goal."

The sexual partners of homosexual men are likely to be someone they previously did not know, researchers found. Nearly 60 percent of respondents said their circle of friends did not know their most recent sex partner.

The most likely meeting place was a bar or dance club, where 50 percent of homosexual men said they met their most recent partner.

Researchers said that homosexual men tended to be primarily "transactional" -- a term used for seeking short-term sexual encounters -- while homosexual women tended to be more relational by seeking "enduring sexual relationships."

Researchers concluded that a number of factors encourage homosexual male promiscuity, including the presence of popular meeting places and the "absence of cultural forces that encourage monogamy."

The research team was led by Edward O. Laumann, professor of sociology at the University of Chicago and the co-author of several other books on sexuality.

Traditionalists say that the lack of monogamy among homosexual men underscores the notion that homosexuality is not natural. They also say that such unhealthy behavior should play a larger role in the national debate over same-sex "marriage," because its legalization would radically undermine the traditional belief in monogamy.

The New York Times ran a story in August showing that homosexuals in Canada, where same-sex "marriage" is legal in two provinces, are not rushing to tie the knot. The story followed two men in their 40s, David Andrew and David Warren, who have lived together for seven years.

Although the men promise to protect one another, the story said "they stop short of monogamy, which is something Mr. Andrew also says he does not believe in."

UNIONS NOT SO BAD? -- USA Today published a poll Jan. 14 showing Americans opposed to same-sex "marriage" but warmer to Vermont-type civil unions.

The USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll found 53 percent of Americans opposed to legalizing same-sex "marriage," 24 percent supportive and 23 percent with no opinion.

In recent weeks most polls have had opposition above 60 percent. The wording of the question may have influenced the outcome. For this poll Gallup asked, "Would you favor or oppose a law that would allow homosexual couples to legally get married, or do you not have an opinion either way?"

In December, though, Gallup asked, "Do you think marriages between homosexuals should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages?" To that question, 65 percent said they were against legalization. The addition of the word "traditional" may have had an influence.

In the latest poll, 41 percent of Americans said they were opposed to the legalization of civil unions while 34 percent supported them and 25 percent had no opinion.

But the poll continued to show a backlash against recent court rulings favorable to homosexuality. By a 49-46 percent margin, Americans said homosexual relationships should be illegal. Not since 1988 have so many people opposed legalizing same-sex relations. It is also the first time since 1996 that the percentage of "illegal" respondents was higher than "legal" respondents.

MASS. VOTE DELAY - Robert E. Travaglini, president of the Massachusetts state senate, says he will delay a scheduled vote on a constitutional amendment if the state's high court has not ruled by then on the question of civil unions, according to the Associated Press.

A vote on a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex "marriage" is scheduled for Feb. 11, but the Senate is waiting on a ruling from the court to see if civil unions would appease the justices.

Senators hope that the legalization of Vermont-type civil unions will avoid a battle over same-sex "marriage."

Meanwhile, some 90 law professors, including the law school deans from Yale and Stanford, filed a brief with the court Jan. 12 arguing that the state constitution requires the legalization of same-sex "marriage." Their brief came in response to the request by the state senate.

LEGAL IN CALIFORNIA? -- Mark Leno, an openly homosexual member of the California state assembly, announced Jan. 12 he would introduce a bill to legalize same-sex "marriage" in California.

"This bill will ensure that our state treats our loving, committed relationships with the respect they deserve," Leno, a Democrat, said in a statement.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said during his campaign that he is opposed to same-sex "marriage."

HEARING IN INDIANA -- The Indiana Court of Appeals heard arguments Jan. 12 in a case over the legalization of same-sex "marriage."

Three homosexual couples are suing for marriage licenses in the Hoosier State. They are being represented by the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, the Indiana branch of the ACLU.

COLEMAN ON BOARD? -- U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., says he expects to support a constitutional marriage amendment, although he opposes the one in its current language, according to the Associated Press.

He said the Federal Marriage Amendment in Congress will have unintended consequences by barring same-sex couples from receiving various benefits --- such as insurance -- that are legal in some states.

"I know that there will be other amendments offered and I expect to support the one that is narrowly tailored to protect marriage because that is what the real issue is," he said.

No, I never saw the PBS story on the gene that protects against AIDS, but now you've piqued my interest, and I'll "google" it: it's bound to be an interesting theory.

It is interesting - so is the search for the plague that might have caused the mutation. About 1% of Northern European descendants have the resistance. It's a double recessive trait which means it has to come from both parents.

This is from the HIV/AIDS Health News site (requires login so I'm posting the article).

Smallpox behind Aids immunity?
11/12/2003
New research suggests the tiny number of people who are immune to Aids are the descendants of Europeans who developed resistance to smallpox in the Middle Ages. Smallpox has left a signature on our genetic makeup, providing a benefit to us 700 years later, says study coauthor Alison Galvani, an epidemiologist at the University of California at Berkeley.
If Galvani is correct, she may have punctured the prevailing wisdom that the prime suspect behind Aids immunity is bubonic plague, the deadly disease that wiped out a third of Europe in the 14th century.
Fascinating and provocative research
The new research is fascinating and provocative, says Cheryl Ann Winkler, a genetic scientist at the American National Cancer Institute who helped develop the plague theory in the late 1990s.
Unfortunately, the findings may reveal more about the past than the future. Experts don't expect their research to have any effect on treatment of people with Aids.
The existence of Aids immunity itself isn't new.
Researchers discovered it in the 1980s during the early years of the Aids epidemic, when they noticed that some people were repeatedly exposed to the virus but didn't get infected.
How gene mutation works
In total, about one percent of people descended from Northern Europeans are virtually immune to Aids. They share one trait in common: a pair of mutated genes that prevent their immune cells from developing a receptor that lets HIV, the Aids virus, break in. It's like a lock and key, Galvani explains: The virus can't gain entry because the lock isn't there.
To be born with a pair of the mutated genes, people must inherit them from both parents. About 10 percent to 15 percent of descendants of Northern Europeans have just one mutated gene, which provides limited protection: It takes longer for those infected with the HIV to actually develop Aids.
The gene mutations are essentially unknown among East Asians, Africans, American Indians and Middle Easterners, although they do appear in Central Asian countries. In Europe, they're most common in Swedes - 14 percent have at least one of mutated genes - and less common in southern European countries such as Greece. The percentages imply that the roots of the gene mutations lie somewhere in the history of Northern Europe.
Mutations traced back to the Middle Ages
In 1998, a team of researchers calculated the mutations are about 700 years old and began searching for an explanation. Some strong selective pressure must have jacked up [their] frequency from a single mutation of one chromosome in one individual to approximately 10 percent of the European population, Winkler says.
The prevailing theory is those who had the mutation were spared infection by one or more diseases and lived to pass the mutation to future generations.
Winkler and colleagues pointed a finger at the plague, a disease that killed as many as 40 percent of Europeans during the Black Death around 1350 and made a return visit two centuries years later. The plague appears to use attack immune cells in a similar way as HIV.
Why smallpox link makes sense
The 1998 study left open the possibility that other diseases - such as smallpox, syphilis or influenza - could have spurred the spread of the genes. In the new study, published in a recent issue of the American Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers argue that the clues point to smallpox, not plague.
Smallpox makes more sense for a variety of reasons, the researchers say, including its stubbornness. While plague came and went in huge waves, smallpox was always around and influencing the genetics of humans.
There's other evidence for smallpox, which was eradicated in the 1970s. The illness largely attacked children, while plague sickened people of all ages. A protective gene is more likely to survive through generations if people who have it spend a lot of time reproducing after they avoid death. Older people have much less impact because they're not going to have children anyway, Galvani says.
Nature also takes away
But things aren't necessarily all wonderful for those with these kinds of mutations. When nature giveth, nature also taketh away. Or, as scientists like Galvani put it, there's a cost of resistance.
For example, one type of gene mutation protects people against malaria, but also makes them more susceptible to sickle cell anaemia. While the mutation currently in question may make people immune to smallpox and HIV, its effects on immune cells could cause people to be more susceptible to other illnesses. Galvani, however, thinks the effects are probably minor.
Significance of the findings?
The impact of the new findings may also be minor. Neither Winkler nor Galvani expects they'll directly lead to new treatments for Aids. But the debate over the origins of HIV immunity is sure to continue as long as scientists such as Galvani are intrigued by the possibilities.
I just find it really fascinating that diseases have left their signatures on our genome, she says. - (HealthDayNews)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.