Look up to 5 Promiscuity? (Part I in a Series) | Gay Life After 40. com

Promiscuity? (Part I in a Series)

3 Comments

Promiscuity? (Part I in a Series)
by Raymond Rigoglioso

Over dinner this week, a friend of mine acknowledged to me that he had trouble getting through the chapter on sexual leadership in Gay Men and The New Way Forward. “I had to keep stopping,” he said, “because my judgments kept coming up.” For him, these judgments focused on the prevalence of non-monogamy among long-term male couples.

“You know, judgments of others are always judgments of self,” I said. “Yes, I understand that,” he replied.

Then he asked me, “Have you done personal work around this?”

“Absolutely. It was the topic of my therapy for a long time,” I responded. “I couldn’t have written that chapter—nor could I be doing the Gay Men of Wisdom work if I hadn’t worked through my sexual shame.”

I know from personal experience how closely judgments of others’ sexuality are tied to one’s sexual shame. In much of my 20s and early 30s, I silently judged gay men for the types and quantity of sex “they” had. It took me years to understand how feelings about my own sexual desires and these judgments were one and the same. When I stopped seeking approval from society about what I like and how I like it, my judgments of others faded. That’s when I understood the connection.

This brings me to “promiscuity.” I have a big beef with this word. There’s no more succinct shorthand for this pairing of judgments. “Promiscuity” is when someone has sex with more people than you think he should have. It’s always relative to the user’s point of view.

Some people—some gay men included—seem to derive satisfaction from labeling gay men “promiscuous.” In doing so, the user conveys there is a “right” and “wrong” way to express sexuality, and that other people should have sex based on his (or society’s) limits. The user rarely understands that he is sending himself the same message: he is shaming, limiting, and castigating himself about his own sexual desire. He uses the power that shaming others gives him to feel better about himself, but doesn’t understand that he injures himself in the process.

We can judge any form of consensual human interaction and shame the person for engaging in it. For instance, would we label a man who has 10 business lunches in a given month “promiscuous?” Is the waitress who serves thousands of customers in her career “promiscuous” because of the extensive human contact she’s had?

The notion is absurd. Consensual human interactions are just that–whether we’re having lunch, serving a meal, or having sex. We’re being human with each other in different ways. The fact that we’re shaming someone for doing it tells us more about ourselves than anything else.

Sex is our life force energy. When we tap into it, we open ourselves to love and our inherent creativity. When we can fully express our sexuality, we can fully express our creativity. We harness our personal power and control our destiny.

The man who is sexually free is free in all areas of his life. The man who shames others sexually limits his own potential.

Let’s consign “promiscuous” to the history books.

About the Author:

Ray is the writer of Gay Men and The New Way Forward

He is the Founder of Gay Men of Wisdom and can be found on  Gay Men of Wisdom.

If you find any joy and stimulation at Gay Life After 40.com, please consider Donating:

You May Also Be Interested In:

3 Comments

  1. Tom

    June 20, 2017 at 6:45 am

    Here I go again, attempting to write an error free message on a tablet.

    Yes, I get the mirror aspect (yawn), but the same holds true for others who judge for not being open enough or sexual enough, resorting to shame or other forms of manipulation to coerce a conquest. As an out late case, the landscepe has changed considerably (when did dual penetration become a thing?) since I dabbled in my youth. There’s a difference between judging someone’s character (for being permiscuous) verses being wary of the consequences of “freer consentual human sexual interactions”.

    The brain likes excitement and novelty, yet it habituates, and seeks novelty again. If someone has been indulging, habituating and seeking novelty for forty more years than someone else, they are likely to have different boundaries than the newcomer. I believe I am capable of being more present with another man, due to limitations and boundaries I have learned and placed on myself, than a man whose pornography addiction has been so severe that he readily slips into his own personal video arcade. I also think there are emotional and relational consequences to hundreds of fleeting encounters that make someone less relationship material if the’ve never said no to their wandering eye.

    And while I may be best aged by carbon dating, I recall a rather nasty epidemic, spending a lot of time in hopsices, something readily poo-poo-ed these days (being dismissed because PrEP promises to always be available, affordable, and covered by insurance, I suppose), yet a close friend of mine has stage three anal cancer, and you have to know the options are unappealing at best and barbaric at worst. Do I judge how or where he managed to get HIV and HPV? Nope. Do I want to take precautions by being highly selective? You bet. And if that means being celibate and single for the rest of this incarnation, so be it.

  2. Tom

    June 20, 2017 at 7:09 am

    Well, hopefully Ryan is “free in all areas of his life”. Too bad gor his betrayed partner though.

    http://www.gaylifeafter40.com/sex-addiction/

  3. Tom

    June 20, 2017 at 8:28 am

    I understand that this site may exist for therapists or bloggers to gain visibility and promote their seminars, products, and services; I would just like to see this topic further developed, clarified, and differentiated for the real world, because like Ryan’s story in the link above, not every consentual person is playing by the same rules.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *