Gay Promiscuity by the Numbers

We’ve had our debates about same-sex marriage at ThePolitic (and I’ve started my share).  Well, nothing’s been settled, and the debate rages.  Scott H. Payne at The League highlights a comment from Joe Carter, posted on a thread at The American Scene:

It’s a radical change even from your own definition, which includes “and commit to do so monogamously.” As has been understood for decades, the homosexual (at least gay male) definition of monogamy does not entail sexual exclusivity. That this fact is dismissed or swept under the rug is not surprising since it would make the cause of SSM even more difficult to achieve. But it’s been well established and used to be the justifying reason why gays weren’t interested in marriage.

If this is an important component of your definition then you need to ask what happens when the majority of gay men refuse to include this in their own definition of “marriage.”

Rather than reject Joe’s contention out of hand, Scott does the responsible thing, and looks for some numbers on monogamy and sexual orientation.  After digging up some stats, I’d describe Scott’s response to Joe as, ‘yes, but…’:

On the face of it, that finding generally supports Joe’s point: gay males are a great deal more likely to engage in sexually non-exclusive relationships. That points remains true both historically, in terms of the 1975 numbers, and more recently, in terms of the 2000 numbers. However, what the numbers also show is that there is a substantial downward trend in attitudes towards extra-marital/extra-partnership encounters and while the rates for such encounters remain higher amongst gay males as compared to other groups, the rates for gay males have declined in a comparable fashion to the declines noted for the other groups, at least as far as this study reveals.

…

What those numbers tell me is that there has been a shift in the recorded attitudes of gay males on the specific topic of extra-marital/extra-partnership sexual encounters that has occurred at a rate that surpasses what these psychologists recorded for all other groups, which, I think, may well indicate a normative change on this particular topic in the specific culture of gay males.

There’s a lot of back and forth in the comments, and Joe Carter responds, in part:

Now people like Conor have the best of intentions. By bringing gay men into the heteronormative circle they believe we can condition them to reject all that “queer stuff.” He thinks that culture would and should shape their attitudes toward monogamy, further bringing them into the mainstrem. Obviously, when this is the attitude that is considered “gay-friendly”, what choice do gay men have but to surrender ot the forces of heteronormative conformity?

But back to the question of how all of this fits into my larger argument. I would say that if the (heterosexual) public were aware of the predominant view of monogamy within the subculture of gay men, they would be less likely to accept same-sex marriage—and for good reason. It is only be being blissfully unaware gay attitudes about monogamy or by being willing to de-queer gay men that the advocates of SSM are advancing the cause.

It’s a very interesting and thoughtful debate.  However, to me, the scope is a little too narrow to be conclusive.  Consequently I ask, am I the only one that believes marriage to be transformative?