Yes, there are some for whom "being hetero" is more than that. You can pretty much always find some weirdos for everything if you look hard enough in socal media. But do those actually form more than some fringe group ? I don't know a single hetero person for whom that is some kind of cultural idendity.
Gena Davis institute on Gender in media tries to link violent games to mass shootings and police violence
- Thread starter Dwarvenhobble
- Start date
Maybe you don't know anyone who has explicitly acknowledged it as a part of their identity.
But the men who make a sport of picking up girls at clubs, or boasting about sexual exploits to their mates, have made sexuality a part of their identity: used it for bonding, and to create an image of themselves. And its also true to say that a lot of them would not react with the same kind or mutual encouragement if one of them was to try to talk about a same-sex sexual exploit.
So yes, it might not be acknowledged explicitly as such, but heterosexuality is a part of their projected identity. I've met more than a few people like this.
That sounds a lot like projecting.
Also, no, never been part of a circle where such behavior was even remotely common or accepted. Sex is pretty private here and not something to boast with or a topic for bonding.
Also, no, never been part of a circle where such behavior was even remotely common or accepted. Sex is pretty private here and not something to boast with or a topic for bonding.
That's probably because heterosexuality is the societal default, so there's little need for straights to express themselves as straight. Society is already expressing their sexuality for them, comforting them in it 24/7.
Projecting? So you're accusing me of boasting about sexual exploits? That's a weird personal accusation to make.
Good for you. That's not true where I live, or where I grew up, or where I attended higher education. It was very common.
Come to think of it, I seem to remember the leader of the free world boasting about grabbing a woman's genitals, and one of the most common defences of his behaviour was that it was "locker room talk", and that that's just how men talk to each other
Last edited:
I'm just going to additionally throw out the fact that these exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck_nutsGood for you. That's not true where I live, or where I grew up, or where I attended higher education. It was very common.
Come to think of it, I seem to remember the leader of the free world boasting about grabbing a woman's genitals, and one of the most common defences of his behaviour was that it was "locker room talk", and that that's just how men talk to each other
The only reason you can say that with a straight face is because your definition of heterosexuality is nothing more. What would you call the heterosexual culture Terminal Blue described? It would be really bold to just call it sexism and then claim you've never even thought of it. But something else, maybe?
Personally I've seen it a few times too. Anyway if you think about it, there are people who are definitely outsiders to hetero culture while not being gay or queer or anything. They often aren't very exciting people. On top of them there are the people Satinavian describes: people that find sexual relationships private and let's call it taboo to discuss casually. I personally find having only neutered conversations with others pretty damn lame, but it might just be me having too much time to think about it all. Then again I find nothing wrong with Trump's pussy grabbin' talk.
No, projecting that sexuality is important for idendity for others as well, even if they never say so.
And no one aside from his sycophants accepted that excuse. Because normal people don't have such locker room talk.Come to think of it, I seem to remember the leader of the free world boasting about grabbing a woman's genitals, and one of the most common defences of his behaviour was that it was "locker room talk", and that that's just how men talk to each other
The thing is that what TerminalBlue describes is nothing i can recognize. That doesn't mean that such a mindset (which certainly is both sexist and heteronormative) does not exist. You will always find some people. But it can't be widespread among heterosexuals so calling it hetero culture is at least misleading.
I am too immersed in pudding to see all the pudding around me, you guys must be lying about all this pudding you’re talking about.
All movies that have happy endings should include in that ending orgies with a wide variety of titillating kinky sex; they should have something for everyone, even somehow the people who want nothing at all.
If we’re both gonna do this we need to line up our jokes or else we’re just gonna look silly.
Ah, yes, it clearly should be “and else we’re just gonna look silly.” My mistake. Very thankful for your correction there.
I dunno if this can be true. For a very clear example men are the initiators in sexual and romantic relationships, and that's very much a cultural thing. Of course in the thread they discussed what's being the "active one" in a relationship which is different and at least imo that's been more equal over here for some time now. But initiation is what guys expect from themselves and girls expect from guys, and going against that, while a small change in theory, doesn't happen as much.
A lot of what's being described here strikes me as bro culture, not "hetrosexual culture," if there is such a thing.
Frankly, I don't think there's such a thing, because I don't think you can, for instance, say there's such a thing as "homosexual culture" either for instance. Not without projecting or getting into stereotypes. If you're going to lump millions, or even billions of people together because of their sexuality, then, well, keep in mind that some people have done that before (and do), and generally not with good intentions.
Frankly, I don't think there's such a thing, because I don't think you can, for instance, say there's such a thing as "homosexual culture" either for instance. Not without projecting or getting into stereotypes. If you're going to lump millions, or even billions of people together because of their sexuality, then, well, keep in mind that some people have done that before (and do), and generally not with good intentions.