Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Video: Doctor claims promiscuity is a legitimate reason to discriminate against LGBT people

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Julian Morrison 16 Mar 2013, 4:16pm

    Promiscuity is not even a legitimate reason to discriminate against promiscuous people!

    1. Promiscuity in people inherent, hetero and non-hetero…

  2. Garry Cassell 16 Mar 2013, 4:23pm

    What did this quack lose his funding for gay cure crap? It’s also obvious he’s not up to date on latest research…I certainly wouldn’t want him to be my doctor…

  3. The Dr is a douche and promiscuity is no reason to discriminate against anyone.

    But 900 sexual partners is ridiculous and must be made up surely.

    1. Definitely sounds like a number he pulled out of his ass, doesn’t it? (Horrific pun intended)
      All this proves to me is that even the educated can be blinded by prejudice. They are more dangerous to us because of the veneer of science they place over their prejudice. They abuse their power to persuade those with less education. “He’s a doctor so it must be true!” Blech.

      1. What an ignorant and useless individual. I’m never surprised by how stupid and willfully ignorant people are. Especially those who claim to be “educated”. Why hasn’t his license been pulled for being horribly and woefully under educated not to mention being a stupid bigoted straight asshole.
        cigarbabe

  4. The volume level is far too low to hear anything

  5. For me, it just shows that even the well educated can still be narrow minded bigots – but are more dangerous because of the veneer of science they apply to their prejudice.

  6. So let me get this straight. This paricular bigot feels it’s ok to discriminate gays for being promiscuous. And when they want to commit to one partner, long term a form of union recognized and protected by the state, ie marriage, he wants to discriminate homosexuals on that too?
    Just what should homosexuals be doing to please your bigoted mind, “Doc”?

    1. Obviously, mike, we should cease to exist so that we don’t “contaminate” the world he’d prefer to see, ie one where the GLBTQ community either doesn’t exist or has us “properly contained” so we don’t spread our diseases to the “good christian” population that fears those who are not following the same “rule book” that they hold so dear.

  7. Liam the God 16 Mar 2013, 4:58pm

    Oddly enough on FB the other week there was a thing about the word “Slut”, and the conclusion was that MEN only call a woman a slut if she’s perceived as “Easy”, but turned the man down. Interesting, eh? Was he trying to do some “Hands On” research but kept getting rebuffed by all the men he approached?
    Also, why is he wearing that ridiculous bow tie? I’d NEVER employ anyone that wore a bow tie!!

    1. Now now , bow ties are cool . If you’re a travelling 900-years-old alien Time Lord.

      1. Liam the God 18 Mar 2013, 3:24pm

        Okay, so if you’re NOT Dr Who, or Professor Heinz Wolff, or wearing a Dinner Suit, you should NEVER wear a Bow Tie!

  8. Liam the God 16 Mar 2013, 5:03pm

    I just noticed after reading it again that he’s citing a survey from 1983! a THIRTY YEAR OLD study, from when very little was known about HIV/AIDS. I really hope he’s not in practise, because I can imagine him using Mediaeval doctoring: “Doctor, I have a headache!” “Hokay, I’ll just drill a hole into the top of your skull. Hold still. Now, you may experience a violent TEARING sensation!”

  9. I think I’d trust my own medical diagnoses over his, and my doctorate is in Medieval History…

  10. Also, 900 sexual partners ON AVERAGE? I mean, come on, really? I’ve been trying for twelve of the thirty intervening years and haven’t managed to find a single one – where was this survey taken, the terminal cases ward of a compulsive liars’ hospital?

    1. casparthegood 16 Mar 2013, 6:02pm

      Wishfull thinkers anonymous more like

  11. Robert A. Cuthbertson, M.D. 16 Mar 2013, 5:19pm

    Dr, Safranek you may have your M.D. but you are still a stupid ass!!! I do not say that with ANY respect..as I also am a board certified physician…

  12. “healthy sexual norm of sex within the context of marriage between monogamous men and women.”

    How does he know what they get up to? Or is he a doctor of assumptions.

  13. Even if his quoted ’900′ figure was true and the study carried out correctly, it says nothing about lesbian or bisexual people, does it? So I presume he’s absoluetly fine with employing lesbians and bisexual people then? NOT.

    He’s just using his degree and some spurious study to promote his own bigotry. Disgusting and mendacious.

  14. When discrimination is the primary purpose legitimacy takes a back-seat

  15. I’m guessing he will be joining one of America’s dole queues when this legislation passes.

  16. Somebody better alert the hookers on the street corners, and the proprietors of them thar houses of ill repute then as they do a pretty damn good business in the straight sector I plumb reckon else they’d not still be plying their particular trade.

    1. Ya but they get fired after their 899th customer just to keep pure.

  17. Even if an average of 900 was accurate, that is no reason for discriminating against anyone. Would he advocate discriminating against a boxer who had been in 900 fights? Or a doctor who had her hands inside the guts of 900 patients? Or a military pilot who killed 900 of the enemy?

    I have tried to be a slut for 30 years, and I didn’t get anywhere near 900. I’m not sure I got to 100. The only conclusion I can make is I am uglier than average.

  18. So, humanity put the pious on a pedestal of virtuosity and it culminated in those same people sexually abusing children en masse. Now we’ve all but unseated these people and elevated the previously persecuted scientists of our day to this proverbial pedestal, and oh look… the educated are now abusing this position too.

    Not only is an average of 900 completely ludicrous to anyone with a modicum of common sense, but the waffle about sex within marriage at the end shines the light on what this person really stands for.

    Disgusting. In order for any worthwhile debate to come from this, everyone should be ignored, and we should just see the blatant current inequality for what it is: Discrimination. No discrimination is acceptable against law abiding citizens.

    The morality of promiscuity is a separate discussion which has no relevance to employment rights for LGBT people. None at all.

  19. David Jordan 16 Mar 2013, 7:16pm

    900 sex partners! I wish! How many people here even know 900 other gay people.
    The report he quotes is over thirty years old, no respectable member of the scientific community would rely on a report ten years old report, many wouldn’t even rely a report fives years old report and he’s trying to past off a report six times that old.
    And what methodology did they use to arrive at the figure of 900 sex partners? I’m sure any modern day peer review would rip it apart.
    This is nothing short of hatred for LGBT people hiding behind scientific fraud.

  20. Just that word “promiscuity” …you can almost hear the religious Gestapo whispering it in the ears of legislators. it says it all.

  21. I am truly amazed at what this totally bigoted and arrogant doctor is claiming and even more so that he’s being listened to by legislators.

    Gay relationships, whether one-night stands or life-long commitments, are based on consent between the adults involved. It is not of any concern to anyone else, certainly not employers. A person’s ability to perform the job should be the only concern of an employer, not the person’s private life outside of working hours. Any good employer knows that.

    What the doctor is saying is that heterosexuals can have a private life free from interference of employers, but gay people shouldn’t have simply because we’re gay! To him, we should all be unemployable and be treated as outcasts, so in other words we should be treated like paedophiles.

    This guy’s views are so extremely bigoted and outlandish that it is him that should be unemployable and treated as an outcast. In the UK he’d be ‘struck off’ and banned from working in the NHS.

  22. This is actually kind of worse than the usual; he’s not just saying LGBT people shoudn’t be protected against discrimination, he’s actually sort of arguing that discrimination should be the law. Typical mysogny I think, gay men and women are seen as pomiscious if they have paticularly active sex lives (well actually we’re seen that way regardless). What about the middle-aged straight men high up who screw around on their wives every time the opportuity presents itself? They should be discriminating against employed single straight men too because I guarantee they’re not celibate either. As long as you’re not having your sex life on their business premises your employer has no right to involve it in your job, even if you are a bit easy. It’s 2013, what the hell does it even matter if someone, man/woman/transgender, likes to have a lot of sex in their spare time?

    1. Misogyny* even, sorry that looks weird not saying I think of us gay men as women, I just vaguely remember seeing an argument somewhere that homophobia is rooted in sexism, and the more stuff I see, the more I think it’s true.

  23. FACT By the end of 2011, an estimated 34 million people were living with HIV worldwide, up 17% from 2001.

    There are no where near that many GAYS in the world – so promiscuous ‘others’ must make up the majority –

    Which would mean this asshole bigot (and probable closet self loather – they usually are) is justifying discrimination at gay men purely out of hatred – That my friends is a crime and punishable by imprisonment –

    lets find the fecker and prosecute him…

  24. PeterinSydney 16 Mar 2013, 10:51pm

    Is there an “ignorant” doctor in the House? How about all the promiscuity of Hetero people? How is that different and more moral

  25. Personally, I think that not being able to be allowed equal rights with other Britons as a transperson until you have a £144 price tag, Gender Recognition Certificate ‘afforded’ by doctors is a legitimate reason to discriminate against doctors.

    Plus, there was Mengele…

    1. Liam the God 16 Mar 2013, 11:07pm

      “GODWIN’S LAW ALERT!”

  26. johnny33308 17 Mar 2013, 1:11am

    I thought doctors had to take an oath “to do no harm”. If that is the case then this one just breached that oath! He uses an almost 30 yr old HIV study as his ‘proof’ that LBGT people are ‘sluts’! And even if what he said were true, so what? Discrimination is discrimination! It is NEVER OK to discriminate, whatever ‘reason’ is given for doing so. What a ignorant bigoted douche pickle!

  27. The definition of anyone who is promiscuous :- “Any one who is getting more than you are” If the cap fits….. I thought MDs had to have an education!?!?!?!?

  28. Oh my god! I’m glad he told me about this – I had no idea. And now I’ve realised I’m about 880 sexual partners short of the everybody else. I’m so sorry about this, and I know that people will think I’m self-centered and selfish, but I’ve been so busy I’ve just not had the time :( If I install loads of dating apps on my smartphone hopefully I can improve my dire piss-poor performance :D

    Love to know where he got those figures – LifeSh1tNews or WingNutDaily ?

    1. Liam the God 17 Mar 2013, 4:05pm

      I’m missing 897 sexual partners, then. In fact, even including FEMALE partners I’m still off by 885! I feel really cheated! I’m nearly 47 and now have no chance of getting anywhere near the average! ;)
      I’m not sure that even PORN STARS get close to that number of partners: A prostitute may get close, I suppose.

  29. He needs to be struck off and go for ‘brain’ cure.

  30. What a jerk. You know in the 80s I was pretty damn promiscuous myself, as a straight woman. I was even pregnant when I graduated high school. Everyone I knew in the 80s was promiscuous so a study of gay men from then is not accurate in 2013.

  31. GulliverUK 17 Mar 2013, 5:46pm

    Ok, so there’s a homophobe going around various comment sections and voting down people – I’ve noticed a consistent pattern of large numbers of people getting -1, so I’ve given everybody a point up — and may I say … you’ve all done very well (for those that are old enough you’ll get the ‘Are you being served?’ reference) :D

    1. LOL @ the Are You Being Served reference! I think it was ‘young Mr Grace’ (called ‘young’ because even though he was in his 80s, he was still younger than his older brother – I think … hopefully I’ve remembered correctly).

      I’ll give you a +1 for that! Pity I can’t keep hitting the ‘thumbs up’ to give you more plusses seeing how you’ve given everyone else a point up.

    2. Captain Peacock?

      The word “promiscuous” sounds a tad right wing christian fundamentalist. I think “sexually sociable” is a much nicer way of putting it.

      .

      1. Ahh, I like the word “promiscuous”. I don’t think it sounds too moralist, it sounds actually a little technical and scientific and I am not ashamed to say I am promiscuous myself (what can I do ? sex is too damn good).

  32. Does that mean we should also be discriminating against minister’s daughters?

    1. Or against ministers and politicians themselves, both the hypocritical homosexual closet cases as the hypocritical heterosexual wife-cheating/hooker-hiring ones ? You know, I don’t even believe there is such thing as a chaste politician in any part of the world, it’s like trying to find a lawyer who has never lied in hs life.

  33. I can’t even bare to watch this video.

    It is totally unfounded and a load of nonsense, even if studies were to prove many men spread aids is it any surprise when they weren’t educated to play safe because talking about it was taboo?

    I’m amazed that people that claim to be intelligent are so uneducated.

    This is a global issue that affects EVERYONE. You don’t have to be a doctor to know that.

  34. “had an average of 900 partners by the age of 35″

    …what?

    …is it bad that I wish I’d have had 900 partners by the age of 35? I mean it’s not too late but I’m not really on track for that at all.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all
Tag Code: