non-techie has fewer letters.
To be honest, I don’t think that is something that CAN be overcome, as to me it seems to be human nature to put vague situations into a context where we can personally identify with them. Example, I am straight, all my relationships have been straight, and that’s the extent of my experience. I read “…she’s screwing the boss…” and I picture the boss as male, then I get to “…she was able to manipulate the system…” and I realize they’re both ladies in a relationship, then I continue reading with that clarification. It’s not that I disapprove or dislike non-hetero relationships, it’s that I am picturing the situation in my head based on my own experience. However, lack of astonishment or outraged indignation is a good thing to strive for. 
Anyway, that woman sounds like a complete pain in the tukus.
Those who use s’s where God intended Z’s should stop worrying about other’s people’s grammar. 
Well, given that the prototypical definition of “fucking” when used as a transitive verb involves the subject penetrating the object (grammatical subject and object! I’m not talking about sex with inanimate objects!) did you assume that “she was fucking the boss” meant she had the old bald dude in the corner office bent over with a dildo up his ass?
You oughta be able to figure out what “fucking” means when it’s in the context of two women. Admittedly, I had to read the thing twice to make sure - because I just have no context associating “lesbians” with “nepotism” - when I think of sleeping your way to the top, I immediately think of a man’s natural willingness to be led around by his willy. But then I saw that both were women, and I figured it out. I’d just say that what Yeticus Rex said was a little bit ignorant, until the strap-on comment. I find that grossly inappropriate. I have a real disgust with straight people who feel entitled to try to figure out “who plays the man and who plays the woman” - it’s shockingly ignorant to act as though gay relationships are some dress-up parody of straight relationships, and it’s tremendously rude to ask about others’ sex lives. Yet it happens to gay people a lot. Sorry, but that’s a pretty hot button topic for a lot of us. I think Yeticus Rex’s comment was seriously rude to gay people in general. Contrarily, matt_mcl’s reply was pretty calm and witty for the pit.
Frankly, I find it more strange than anything else that so many straight people are surprised and need to ask for confirmation when someone casually references a gay relationship. “Oh, he’s dating this guy who works at the record store.” “Wait, you mean he’s - uh - he’s gay?” “No, he’s just really nearsighted and hasn’t gotten his glasses updated in awhile. Boy will he ever be surprised when he finds out!” This conversation gets old after awhile. I’ve learned to just smile and say yes, but it’s interesting that so many heteros need to carefully check before they’re willing to believe someone’s queer.
[[but it’s interesting that so many heteros need to carefully check before they’re willing to believe someone’s queer.]]
True. But if the rest of them queers would come out of the closet and quit trying to pretend to the world they’re straight, it would happen a lot less! 
Of course that can be a risky thing to do in this society, but living in this society is what makes so many heteros assume everybody is straight and express surprise/surprize at comfortable, every-day talk of being gay. I have been in work/community situations where I was one of few straight folks and had gay people need confirmation and express shock and awe about my non-gayness, too.
My theory is that much of the basis of homophobia is the fact that our culture is primarily sex-phobic. When heterosexuals date, marry, even have kids; it is thought to be the mainstream culture “regular” thing to do. People don’t immediately try to picture who is on top in bed. We can stay in denial about the sexual experiences of that couple. So when somebody is identified as gay, it has nothing to do with the typical pairing-for-the-purposes-of-procreating to the majority straight world and the relationship becomes defined by the SEX ACT, which our society is simultaneously disgusted and mesmerized by.
And yeah, it’s rude to ask about others’ sex lives but gimme a break: I’ve never heard anybody talk so much about their sex lives as some of the gay men I know.
But computer programming is a lot more interesting to talk about, so sorry for the hijack…
No, I didn’t.
I am indeed able, as soon as I determined we were talking about two women. Because I am heterosexual, my frame of reference was in those terms first. However, when I read it again, I was perfectly able to come to the correct conclusion.
So we both had the wrong first impression.
Well, of course you do; you are gay, it is your frame of reference. Mine is just different, not wrong. Vive le difference!
See, though, there’s where it’s confusing. I was once discussing the tv show E.R. with a casual friend, and I gushed (as I do when the topic comes up) about the gorgeosity of actor Goran Visnjic. She then asked, tentatively, “So, uh, are you gay?” And trust me, she was not the sort of person who was shy or bashful about sexual topics. Not even slightly. I do my part, dammit . . . why’re the heteros always so shocked?
I’d link it heavily to sexism; I think that beyond both being gender issues, that they reinforce each other and both feminism and homosexuality are threatening because they undermine the social power of straight men. That’s a simplified version of it, but I think there’s a strong case to be made that they’re related.
Some do. I kindly ask them to shut up when they do so. It’s still another thing entirely to just ask someone intimate details of their sex life, if they haven’t already provided them spontaneously.
Yep. However, you and I (unlike this hijack’s inspiration) both had the sense to revise our first impressions when contrary evidence presented itself. Without asking about anyone’s sex life in the process . . .
Oh no, this hijack is way more interesting. Seriously.
Jeesh, he expressed profuse apologies twice for his goofball statement. Can’t ya just move on?
Besides which, everyone’s overlooking the really crucial issue in this debate.
Are the lesbians in question hot?
On the subject of cow-orkers: 1) how do you “ork” a cow, and 2) how much does it pay?
If you know, is there a degree involved, or at least a certificate, or can anyone get into the business?
Straying slightly from the fascinating object/subject discussion as regards the word “fuck”: People who think they’re qualified when they’re clearly not are Satan’s own revenge on those who actually made the effort to become halfway competent.
My pet dislike is the self-diagnoser who’s invariably wrong - I just had one.
<Spiny’s phone rings>
Annoying twit with chirpy voice: “Hi, this is PC support for XYZ department. We need ports A, B and C opened in the firewall between here and our Mexico location - how soon can you do that ?”
Spiny:“Hmm, that’s going to be a bit tricky - that location is on a secure WAN link and as such does not get filtered in the slightest. Can you tell me what symptoms you’re seeing ?”
Atwcv:“We’re not getting traffic through on these ports. Can you check your filters, please ?”
Spiny:“We do not have any filters of any sort on that line. Could be an MTU issue, I guess. Could you tell me how the problem manifests itself ?”
Atwcv:“Well, our traffic does not seem to get through, it’s very strange.”
Spiny (slightly impatient): “Perhaps if you can you tell me how the traffic is generated - what application ?”
Atwcv: “It’s this videoserver and it works great locally, but we can’t get it to run over the WAN, so I’m pretty sure it must filter somewhere…”
Spiny (thinking): “WILL you let GO of your filtering idea and just give some data to troubleshoot the goddarn problem, as you have obviously pulled the wrong idea out of whatever grab-bag passes for your accumulated network knowledge ?”
Spiny (saying): “Perhaps if you could let me have a copy of the client software, I could install it locally ?”
Atwcv finally gives in: “If that’s really necessary, I suppose I could. Are you SURE you’re not filtering ?”
Spiny (with extreme patience and very fake cheerfulness):“Pretty sure, yeah. Let’s get the software and take it from there…”
Software arrives, installs in a minute and communicates with videoserver without any problem at all. I can now see our parking lot in Mexico. This not a network issue. I call back with malice aforethought…
Spiny: “The software works great from my laptop, I really think the issue is elsewhere…”
Atwcv still does not want to let go of his network theory: “Oh. Well, the user IS in another building…”
Spiny (realizing that the twit is never ever going to understand, nor do his job):“Never mind, tell you what. I’ll grab hold of the Windows platform expert, then we’ll go do some deskside support, see if we can get this sorted out.”
Atwcv belatedly realizes that deskside support is HIS job and that he won’t be able to get credit for taking care of the issue: “Ehm, perhaps I should go check it out my-”
Spiny’s turn to get all chirpy:“Nah, let’s get this nailed. I’ll keep you posted. Bye”
- and then we went to the client’s desktop. 3 engineers with 25 years of experience between us. To find the user mistyped his password. :mad:
Sigh. I just want to run a network. Really.
Christ, I was just responding to someone else’s post. I’m sorry I offended you.
BTW, though, JillGat: He made a completely jackass comment. Maybe you can’t see just how fucking rude it was, but I think I explained why I was offended by it earlier. Then, when called (mildly) on it, he responded with rolleyes and sarcasm. He finally reluctantly apologized not for the offensive comment but for assuming Ashtar had screwed up his post, and then for “hijacking”. Both reluctant apologies failed to address the point that offended me.
I don’t wish to hold his feet over the fire, because I don’t really care. I made a couple general observations about something that irritates me as a fairly frequent recipient of heterosexism (look the word up if you don’t know what it means - it’s not the same as homophobia), I explained exactly why what Yeticus said was so rude since no one else had and I thought perhaps many straight people didn’t have the frame of reference to understand why that sort of thing is a hot-button topic for us, and in the post you protested, I just wanted to reassure Fear Itself if he thought I thought ill of him for assuming something. Making a false assumption is fine. Being a rude jackass is not. If you think I’m trying to pit Yeticus, I’m not. I really, honestly just wanted to explain something about gay people to straight people. I value open communication. You’ve indicated already that you don’t care to read more on the subject in the thread - I’m sorry, again, if my followup with Fear Itself bothered you, but I didn’t want to create bad feelings with him. I know it’s not something you care to hear any more about, so I’ll stop with this post.
Well, that all depends. Does the idea of two potato-shaped, 60-something women going at it turn you on?
Yo-Yo MA!!
Ya see, this is why, when my computer got totally infested with viruses - I finally felt good about calling IT support. My computer had to be totatally re-configured.
All those times when I was told to turn the computer off then on again - were finally forgotten. I had a ligitimate, ‘difficult’ problem.
Also, addressing the hijack - albeit a little late in the piece. We mentally work from what we consider ‘normal’. This may or may not coincide with what is the societal norm.
So if, in my world, most bosses are men, then I’m going to assume this or if most crime is committed by blacks, or that most people are hetero, then I’m going to assume this - if I have no information to the contrary. Yes, this is stereotyping, yes, it is not necessarily a good thing but it is what we tend to do.
I grew up with a mum who was 7 years older than my dad - I assumed all mums were older than dads - this was normal in my world, until I found out otherwise.
So I guess what I’m trying to say is; don’t beat yourself up for assuming something, but also be open to other possibilities.
I just wanted to break my silence to say that I am sorry for doing that as well. My comment was out of line…I will try to be more sensitive to that in the future. Thanks for pointing that out, seriously.
Furtheremore, the word “fucking” sometimes means “having naked happy sex with” and sometimes means “specifically penetrating, usually with a penis”. You wouldn’t say “so, last night, I was eating out my girlfriend, and after 5 minutes of fucking, my tongue got tired”. But you might say, “yeah, she and I fuck 2 or 3 times a week”, even if some of those times are just oral sex. So the word “fucking” does have mild connotations of, if not heterosexuality, at least penetration, that other terms, such as “sleeping together”, don’t. At least, that’s how I see it.
That said, asking about someone’s sex life like that is quite rude.
(By the way, the first time I read “because you’re fucking my boss”, I read it as meaning “because you’re my fucking boss”, as in, the word “fucking” was just added for emphasis. Which made the whole story make even less sense.)
To continue talking about those 2Hot60+Lezzzzbians™ some more:
If we’re gonna talk about what goes where with it comes to being proper lesbos, then, according to Siddartha Vicious in his thread about being forced to whack off in public, they would be rubbing together their “hoohaa” and “snicker-lala.” Given the breadth (and depth) of Sid’s scientific knowledge, doesn’t seem like penises and dildos belong anywhere in this deal.
Just fightin’ ignorance, is all.
And on that note: MelCthefirst, blacks do not commit the majority of crimes. If I understand the statistics correctly, more blacks commit crimes in proportion to our numbers, but that does not translate into our committing most crimes. (Yes, I know this a great big hijack.)