• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Bros or 'Mos

I went to a wedding a couple weeks ago, and my roommate and I drove together. Neither of us had dates to the wedding; we were just meeting a larger group of our friends there. The photographer came around to take pictures of everybody with their dates. So she got around to me and asked who I was with...so I pointed to my roommate and said, "Him."

She got very uncomfortable and was like, "Oh...why don't we just take a picture of the whole table?" :lol:

One of my sister's college roommates was getting married, and her friend needed a date. It was in Ohio, and the friend decided to bring me as her date so we could all just have fun together. There were a lot of questioning looks when she went around introducing me as her date all evening. :lol:

On topic, I don't think I've ever wondered about this. Come to think of it, I never wonder if two people together are a couple or not.
 
Oddly, I usually assume that if I see a man and a woman together then they're together.

With two guys I don't really think anything either way.
 
Heterosexuality is the norm from which others differ, just as being right-handed is the norm from which left-handers differ, or white the norm (in most western societies) from which blacks, asians, etc. differ.

The norm or the majority? Those are two different things. It's probably safe to say that in the U.S. the majority of the population consists of Caucasians, followed by Hispanics, African-Americans, and Asians. The majority of a certain demographic, say, of people living in California from ages 18 through 65 identify as heterosexuals (rather than LGBT). A non-white person is certainly not less normal (or more normal, for that matter) than a person of Caucasian background, just as a left-handed person shouldn't be considered not normal or less normal.

You're splitting hairs to no apparent end, and you changed my words to do it. The meaning of 'normal' is highly contextual. In some cases it constitutes preferential endorsement, in others not. Obviously this is one of the times in which it did not, and yet the risk was there that my meaning could be misconstrued and so I instead went for 'norm', which drops some connotations from the table (i.e. endorsement) and adds others (i.e. prescriptive) which even more obviously do not apply in this instance. Fat lot of good that did. :lol:

Yup, and the moon is made of green cheese. Why not just get straight to the point instead of being evasive and vague? I won't hold your personal perspectives against you. ;)
 
He already did get straight to the point, and I don't think it's what you think it is.
 
Like Hermoid, if I see a man and a woman together I often assume they're a couple, but if I see two people of the same sex I always assume they're just friends, well unless they're holding hands or kissing or something then I might be a little suspicious. TBH I'm a little slow when it comes to stuff like feelings and people being interested in one another. Unless there's a sign around there next I can't read people for sh*t.
 
^That's not quite what I said - when I see two guys together I don't think anything either way, I don't assume they're friends or a couple.
 
The norm or the majority? Those are two different things. It's probably safe to say that in the U.S. the majority of the population consists of Caucasians, followed by Hispanics, African-Americans, and Asians. The majority of a certain demographic, say, of people living in California from ages 18 through 65 identify as heterosexuals (rather than LGBT). A non-white person is certainly not less normal (or more normal, for that matter) than a person of Caucasian background, just as a left-handed person shouldn't be considered not normal or less normal.

You're splitting hairs to no apparent end, and you changed my words to do it. The meaning of 'normal' is highly contextual. In some cases it constitutes preferential endorsement, in others not. Obviously this is one of the times in which it did not, and yet the risk was there that my meaning could be misconstrued and so I instead went for 'norm', which drops some connotations from the table (i.e. endorsement) and adds others (i.e. prescriptive) which even more obviously do not apply in this instance. Fat lot of good that did. :lol:

Yup, and the moon is made of green cheese. Why not just get straight to the point instead of being evasive and vague? I won't hold your personal perspectives against you. ;)

You're a dick. :)
 
biggayal2.png
 
See now if I saw that, I could probably tell everyone else needs identity tags with their gender, age, orientation and marital status printed on. Also preferably weather they actually are interested in me.
 
^In that case i might have to recheck my proclivity for the opposite sex. Im always horny!!

An interesting, if confusing, comment from someone who announced she was going to 'try' being gay for a while. :confused:

Well i was going to say that it explained a lot, but really i didnt think anyone would have remembered that old thread. :lol:

Never underestimate my ability to remember threads that start with the statement that all men are assholes.
 
An interesting, if confusing, comment from someone who announced she was going to 'try' being gay for a while. :confused:

Well i was going to say that it explained a lot, but really i didnt think anyone would have remembered that old thread. :lol:

Never underestimate my ability to remember threads that start with the statement that all men are assholes.

Wow that was so long ago...

In that time, ive bought a house, got a promotion, and learned to live life as a single mom.

I dont question my sexuality anymore though. Ive learned a lot of myself over the last three years. :)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top