unicorn booty, gay news, gay blog, iq, gay sex

Gay Man Banned From Having Sex Because Of Low IQ

unicorn booty, gay news, gay blog, iq, gay sex
Is it possible to not be smart enough for sex?

A British High Court Judge has cited a controversial law usually invoked to force mentally incompetent patients to undergo life-saving surgeries to ban a man from having sex with his boyfriend.

The 41 year old man in question, referred to only as Alan, has an “inappropriately vigorous sex drive”, but a considerable learning disability and an IQ of only 48. The average adult IQ is closer to 100.

Mail Online reports:

Justice Mostyn said: ‘Alan does not have the capacity to consent to and engage in sexual relations.

‘In such circumstances it is agreed that the present regime for Alan’s supervision and for the prevention of future sexual activity is in his best interests.

Alan, who lived in a house owned by the council, was in a sexual relationship with someone known as Kieron and contact between the two men has been restricted.

He was said to be physically able but ‘seriously challenged in all aspects of his mental functionality.’

Alan’s learning disability has apparently made sex education an impossible task, hence the outright ban. Hmm. On one hand, it troubles us that a gay man – any gay man – has been legally prevented from having sex with his boyfriends. On the other, as soon as words like “consent” begin being tossed around, it obviously changes the story. We’re really not quite sure what to make of this.

Do you think judges should be allowed to ban gay sex because of low IQ?

Via DailyMail UK

  • The question is how did this even make it into the court? I don’t think you can make a meaningful comment until we know who lodged the complaint/filed the suit and why?

  • The question is how did this even make it into the court? I don’t think you can make a meaningful comment until we know who lodged the complaint/filed the suit and why?

  • If that was the case – SOOOOOOO many straight people need to be tested!

  • Jonathan Long

    They are banning the guy from having sex because he does not have the mental capacity to consent. He does not understand the consequences of his actions (STDs, etc.). The ban is meant to protect him from being taken advantage of. In my mind his sexual orientation does not come in to play here other than some nut going into a tirade of a gay guy taking advantage of ‘Alan’.

  • It’s definitely one of the stranger stories we’ve seen!

  • It’s definitely one of the stranger stories we’ve seen!

  • So it kind of sounds as if the guy doesn’t have many things going for him.. but his sex drive is one of them. Is this now going to be considered cruel and unusual punishment? A strong sex drive, but a life sentenced to never having it.. sounds pretty horrible.

  • They are not banning “gay sex”.. they are banning sex. This has nothing to do with him being gay and the title of the article is misleading.

  • I already thought they did a study to show the negative correlation between sex drive and IQ.. at least in males! As sex drive increases.. IQ decreases!

  • Our sex education in this country is so poor, that I think there are several IQ normative people who don’t understand the consequences of their actions as well. Should we then ban all of them from sex as well? Should their be a special “drivers” license given to people before they are legal to have sex?

  • Sounds like some folks we know! 😀

  • Sounds like some folks we know! 😀

  • I disagree. The man in question has been banned from having sex with his boyfriend. That fact alone is why the story is even relevant to this site. We cover all of the information provided in the post we’ve written, and even mention that we are at a loss for if this is or is not the right thing to do.

    It’s impossible to sum up an entire news item in a single 160 character headline, but I’d say “Gay Man Banned From Having Sex Because of Low IQ” comes pretty close! 😀

    What would you have titled this article?

  • I disagree. The man in question has been banned from having sex with his boyfriend. That fact alone is why the story is even relevant to this site. We cover all of the information provided in the post we’ve written, and even mention that we are at a loss for if this is or is not the right thing to do.

    It’s impossible to sum up an entire news item in a single 160 character headline, but I’d say “Gay Man Banned From Having Sex Because of Low IQ” comes pretty close! 😀

    What would you have titled this article?

  • Being gay has nothing to do with it. The issue is how to meet the sexual needs of the intellectually disabled. They have desires like anyone else, but need to express those with careful supervision (not during, just arranging) because they don’t understand the physical and emotional consequences of their actions. By focusing on the fact that he’s gay you’re ignoring the real issue: the severe retardation of someone with an IQ of 42. Being gay is a side issue in this case.

  • Being gay has nothing to do with it. The issue is how to meet the sexual needs of the intellectually disabled. They have desires like anyone else, but need to express those with careful supervision (not during, just arranging) because they don’t understand the physical and emotional consequences of their actions. By focusing on the fact that he’s gay you’re ignoring the real issue: the severe retardation of someone with an IQ of 42. Being gay is a side issue in this case.

  • Jamey Dixon

    If that was the case – SOOOOOOO many straight people need to be tested!

  • Jonathan Long

    They are banning the guy from having sex because he does not have the mental capacity to consent. He does not understand the consequences of his actions (STDs, etc.). The ban is meant to protect him from being taken advantage of. In my mind his sexual orientation does not come in to play here other than some nut going into a tirade of a gay guy taking advantage of ‘Alan’.

  • Justice Calo Reign

    So it kind of sounds as if the guy doesn’t have many things going for him.. but his sex drive is one of them. Is this now going to be considered cruel and unusual punishment? A strong sex drive, but a life sentenced to never having it.. sounds pretty horrible.

  • Harrol Aerioan

    They are not banning “gay sex”.. they are banning sex. This has nothing to do with him being gay and the title of the article is misleading.

  • Justice Calo Reign

    I already thought they did a study to show the negative correlation between sex drive and IQ.. at least in males! As sex drive increases.. IQ decreases!

  • Justice Calo Reign

    Our sex education in this country is so poor, that I think there are sevarl IQ normative people who don’t understand the consequences of their actions as well. Should we then ban all of them from sex as well? Should their be a special “drivers” license given to people before they are legal to have sex?

  • Anonymous

    That’s ridiculous. They’re banning him from having sex with his boyfriend. They are at no risk of STDs if they are just having sex with each other. By keeping them apart, they are both more likely to have sex with others, so the judge is putting them at more risk. In addition, keeping him away from his boyfriend is simply cruel.

  • Anonymous

    That’s ridiculous. They’re banning him from having sex with his boyfriend. They are at no risk of STDs if they are just having sex with each other. By keeping them apart, they are both more likely to have sex with others, so the judge is putting them at more risk. In addition, keeping him away from his boyfriend is simply cruel.

  • DavidT2

    That’s ridiculous. They’re banning him from having sex with his boyfriend. They are at no risk of STDs if they are just having sex with each other. By keeping them apart, they are both more likely to have sex with others, so the judge is putting them at more risk. In addition, keeping him away from his boyfriend is simply cruel.

  • DavidT2

    That’s ridiculous. They’re banning him from having sex with his boyfriend. They are at no risk of STDs if they are just having sex with each other. By keeping them apart, they are both more likely to have sex with others, so the judge is putting them at more risk. In addition, keeping him away from his boyfriend is simply cruel.

  • so, if they banned a gay man from having sex because of low iq, why haven’t they banned straight people with low iq’s from having sex? for that matter, what gives them the right to ban ANYBODY from having sex? much as i wish idiots would stop breeding, nobody has the right to ban it.

  • kiden

    so, if they banned a gay man from having sex because of low iq, why haven’t they banned straight people with low iq’s from having sex? for that matter, what gives them the right to ban ANYBODY from having sex? much as i wish idiots would stop breeding, nobody has the right to ban it.

  • ThomasBaggett

    “Should mentally disabled individuals be denied sexual activity?” That’s a better article title, in my opinion. Yours is misleading. Low IQ could be anything from 60 to 85, while an IQ of 48 is a whopping 3.46 standard deviations BENEATH average! In terms of percentile, that means that 0.03% of people are less intelligent (when taken from a normal population curve). Literally, this means the individual in question is NOT NORMAL.

    Honestly, I love your site. But in this instance you’re overreaching. The fact that he’s homosexual has nothing to do with the situation, but if you want to focus on it, then it’s actually a good thing that the courts are stepping in. Regardless of whether you agree with their decision, they are erring on the side of caution in regards to the HUMAN who is within their jurisdiction. Your title is inflammatory and pandering, and I hope that that type of communication is beneath you. We do not need members of the LGBT community to begin taking class notes from the demagogues on the FOX News team.

    H

  • Jim Platt

    The way it’s written it sounds as if the judge’s IQ is low….

  • Anonymous

    Hmm low IQ no breeding …….High IQ breed all you want. I think it has merit. However in the gay arena, well that is another thing altogether isn’t it. They will bare no fruit from their joining so on that note it should be fine however add the words consent and mental competence then we have an entirely different dynamic don’t we. If some one cannot competently give consent does this not boarder line rape? Gay, Straight it all boils down to this peeps, Let them start taking away even your most basic rights without consent from the populous and you will wake up a prisoner of your own designe.

  • Anonymous

    Hmm low IQ no breeding …….High IQ breed all you want. I think it has merit. However in the gay arena, well that is another thing altogether isn’t it. They will bare no fruit from their joining so on that note it should be fine however add the words consent and mental competence then we have an entirely different dynamic don’t we. If some one cannot competently give consent does this not boarder line rape? Gay, Straight it all boils down to this peeps, Let them start taking away even your most basic rights without consent from the populous and you will wake up a prisoner of your own designe.

  • Umbrellacorp1

    Hmm low IQ no breeding …….High IQ breed all you want. I think it has merit. However in the gay arena, well that is another thing altogether isn’t it. They will bare no fruit from their joining so on that note it should be fine however add the words consent and mental competence then we have an entirely different dynamic don’t we. If some one cannot competently give consent does this not boarder line rape? Gay, Straight it all boils down to this peeps, Let them start taking away even your most basic rights without consent from the populous and you will wake up a prisoner of your own designe.

  • Umbrellacorp1

    Hmm low IQ no breeding …….High IQ breed all you want. I think it has merit. However in the gay arena, well that is another thing altogether isn’t it. They will bare no fruit from their joining so on that note it should be fine however add the words consent and mental competence then we have an entirely different dynamic don’t we. If some one cannot competently give consent does this not boarder line rape? Gay, Straight it all boils down to this peeps, Let them start taking away even your most basic rights without consent from the populous and you will wake up a prisoner of your own designe.

  • Thomas Baggett

    “Should mentally disabled individuals be denied sexual activity?” That’s a better article title, in my opinion. Yours is misleading. Low IQ could be anything from 60 to 85, while an IQ of 48 is a whopping 3.46 standard deviations BENEATH average! In terms of percentile, that means that 0.03% of people are less intelligent (when taken from a normal population curve). Literally, this means the individual in question is NOT NORMAL.

    Honestly, I love your site. But in this instance you’re overreaching. The fact that he’s homosexual has nothing to do with the situation, but if you want to focus on it, then it’s actually a good thing that the courts are stepping in. Regardless of whether you agree with their decision, they are erring on the side of caution in regards to the HUMAN who is within their jurisdiction. Your title is inflammatory and pandering, and I hope that that type of communication is beneath you. We do not need members of the LGBT community to begin taking class notes from the FOX News team.

    H

  • Jim Platt

    The way it’s written it sounds as if the judge’s IQ is low….

  • They are not banning him from having sex because he is gay they are banning him because he has the mind of a small child. They have banned sex of straights in the same condition. What I find to be just outrageous is the fact that some one would have sex with this man. It does not matter how good looking he is he has the MIND OF A CHILD. What kind of person would take advantage of someone like that, it’s mental statutory rape!

  • They are not banning him from having sex because he is gay they are banning him because he has the mind of a small child. They have banned sex of straights in the same condition. What I find to be just outrageous is the fact that some one would have sex with this man. It does not matter how good looking he is he has the MIND OF A CHILD. What kind of person would take advantage of someone like that, it’s mental statutory rape!

  • They do this with straight people who are mentally challenged as well – especially straight couples, actually, because of the pregnancy issue. If anything, this is making it even across the board.

    Because this man is mentally handicapped, he does not understand sexual education. Yes, they are taking away his right to sleep with another consenting adult, but such a right is often taken away when things like the right to survival and physical security comes up – a right that is deemed more important than the right to choose their partners. Despite his physical age, his mental age is much younger and is essentially a child.

    His boyfriend may be someone of the same mental capacity as well; generally, they do couple together because they have the same sexual desires as any other person. Again though, it comes down to ensuring their safety. This is a traditional precaution taken with many severe mental handicaps.

    If this man did not have such severe handicap and they could both understand the sexual education, then they would be allowed the relationship. This has nothing to do with gay rights; it deals with the messier world of mental handicaps.

  • They do this with straight people who are mentally challenged as well – especially straight couples, actually, because of the pregnancy issue. If anything, this is making it even across the board.

    Because this man is mentally handicapped, he does not understand sexual education. Yes, they are taking away his right to sleep with another consenting adult, but such a right is often taken away when things like the right to survival and physical security comes up – a right that is deemed more important than the right to choose their partners. Despite his physical age, his mental age is much younger and is essentially a child.

    His boyfriend may be someone of the same mental capacity as well; generally, they do couple together because they have the same sexual desires as any other person. Again though, it comes down to ensuring their safety. This is a traditional precaution taken with many severe mental handicaps.

    If this man did not have such severe handicap and they could both understand the sexual education, then they would be allowed the relationship. This has nothing to do with gay rights; it deals with the messier world of mental handicaps.

  • If his partner is of a similar mental capacity, what’s the problem? they are still going to have sexual desires just like any other adult but unlike fully developed adults they probably cant understand why they aren’t allowed to have sex and that is unfair to them. this is a matter of human rights including the rights of the mentally disadvantaged.

  • If his partner is of a similar mental capacity, what’s the problem? they are still going to have sexual desires just like any other adult but unlike fully developed adults they probably cant understand why they aren’t allowed to have sex and that is unfair to them. this is a matter of human rights including the rights of the mentally disadvantaged.

  • I agree and I would be concerned that without an outlet for sexual frustration, more violent tendencies may arise as a result. It’s really a horrible horrible decision on the judge’s part.

  • I agree and I would be concerned that without an outlet for sexual frustration, more violent tendencies may arise as a result. It’s really a horrible horrible decision on the judge’s part.

  • nessa

    I actually agree with TB here. ( May I call you TB, Hi thanks!) as I’m related to someone who is bisexual and the doc declared him too mentally incompetent to consent…and he isn’t as bad off IQ wise as this guy. I think just repeated at the end of the article that he is gay is trying to tie it in here a bit too much. I do like that the article and issue made it on here though, as this is more complex than people realize. They want love and intimacy just as much sometimes, but the problems that can go hand in hand are difficult. If you have seen how someone can react to an everyday problem, or see how violent someone is, imagine putting emotional things like love or hate in there. If someone is not okay tot ake care of themselves, how can they cre for a chid?

  • Agreed with Meredith, the gayness is not really important to the story.
    Also, mentally disabled people should be euthanized by the time they would have any sexual interests anyway.

  • so now we are going to arrange sex for people with low IQs? Some kind of “social service pimp”? Completely ridiculous! And what is the IQ marker determining when people are not competent to brush their teeth without poking their eyes out?

  • Oh bull! We don’t know the mental capacity of the “boyfriend” AND wasn’t homosexuality once considered an illness and worthy of intervention? I still want to hear how this ended up in front of a judge.

  • Well now that we have a judge to determine who is too dumb to have sex, I guess we’ll have a judge to determine who is too ugly to have sex?…too old? (heart attacks!) Come on people!

  • I’m so disappointed in UB right now.
    He’s not “stupid” or “dumb”, he’s mentally handicapped/disabled. He is not mentally capable of consenting to sexual intercourse (and certainly not capable of calling the police to report a rape, or even really understand the concept of rape as a crime), preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS and other STDs/STIs, or controlling his emotional reactions to external stimuli.
    That’s why he is being prevented from having sex.
    I’d say that the judge was brave to pass this sentance in the face of a community who would see this only as UB has seen it; preventing a stupid man from having sex cause he was gay. I know it’s hard to believe but not -everyone- is out to get us.
    I wish more research on the mentally handicapped community had been done before this article was posted.
    I’m an identified gifted student with an IQ of 145. I’m a lesbian. I also have a mental health disorder. So, I’m educated on all sides here and it hurts me deeply that the gay community is so quick and easy to use ignorant slurs against other minoritys. In calling this man stupid, “Is it possible not to be smart enough to have sex?”, and making jokes about him in the comments, you’re using the same kind of subtle hate tactics that homophobic people use against us when they say things like “I don’t care what you do in the bedroom, but I don’t want to see it”. They think they’re not being offensive, but they are.
    You think you’re not being offensive, but you are. This whole article is misleading and hurtful and I hope that, as easily as Unicorn Booty can see the fear-driven ignorance in others, that they can see it in themselves this time.

  • Rachel

    Good points, Thomas. I agree. It’s a tricky subject, but it has little to do with homosexuality and more to do with ability. Should someone with a severely low IQ be allowed to have sex? Is consent or freedom more important?

  • Rachel

    …this is sarcasm, right?

  • I live in the UK and haven’t heard of this. I doubt it’s even true. The Daily Mail is a right wing piece of shit that spews lies all of the time. I would never cite it as a source of information.

  • The Telegraph article is more informative than the Daily Mail one. It’s a temporary ban whilst they teach him some Sex Education in order for him to be able to make more informed and safe decision for himself. Also, a big part of their concern was that he thought babies were delivered by a Stork. So his sexual orientation wasn’t a factor. It’s not like the states. We don’t stand for bigotry over here half as much

  • Thomas Baggett

    What?!  I’m really hoping for sarcasm, like Rachel is.  Regardless, there’s a 50% chance (not being able to hear your tone) that you, Lilla, are a horrific person.

    Again, hoping for the sarcasm, in which case, your “edit” instincts failed you on this one.

  • Thomas Baggett

    I do not know (for a fact) how the Judicial system became so thoroughly involved, but I can imagine that it just took the course as per usual the usual in bureaucratic operations.  Someone (perhaps his social worker) noticed that he was having a sexual relationship, and the paperwork began. 

    Yes, there is a possibility that this began nefariously, but with an IQ of 48 I have to imagine that Play-Doh is the only boyfriend this poor chap can really have. 

    The sexual preference, in the end, has no bearing.  It’s an IQ thing.  That’s all.