Poll: Is it wrong to automatically assume some is heterosexual?

[Haydyn]

If we go down that road:
It's offensive to assume someone has a job because some people don't.
It's offensive to assume somebody likes ice cream because some people don't/are lactose intolerant.
It's offesnive to assume somebody doesn't mind if the door is held open for them, because some people don't.

Sexuality isn't the most open topic. I don't assume somebody is any sexuality until I have evidence to prove one way or the other. I know bisexuals and homosexuals. They usually don't take offence to assumptions.

When I met my friend who is now like a big sister, she had a boyfriend at the time and reffered to a girl as her girlfriend. Well, girlfriend could mean girlfriend, or just a girl who is a friend. I asked her if she meant like a friend. She responded by saying she meant actual girlfriend, and that she is bisexual. She had no problem with my inquiry.

In a perfect world, we wouldn't have such lables. It's to the point where men will try to avoid anything that might make them look gay because they are so defencive of their staightness. I guess if you were paranoid about not offending someone and couldn't tell what their sexuality was, you could just ask them what they prefer. You can even have some fun with it.

 

[LiquidGrape]

Yes. It is. The heteronormative is bad mojo.

 

[Squeaky]

Even though you cant spell assume without ass, no i think its ok i generally dont care what people sexual preference is though so unless they let slip i dont ask.

 

[Maze1125]

As a few others have said, yes it is wrong to presume.

If I'm interviewing candidates for a job and I know from past experience that most women don't have enough experience for the job, does that make it right to presume any woman applying can't be a good enough candidate, so dismiss her automatically?
Of course not. I can gain precise information easily just by asking and nothing is gained by presuming either way.

The same is true of someone sexuality, you gain nothing by presuming either way and, if you really must know, you can gain the information easily by asking, so why presume at all? If you presume, you're right 90% of the time, but if you don't presume at all, you're right 100%.

Yes, in life there are times when you have to make presumptions, otherwise things won't work out very well but this isn't one of those times. This is a time when the presumption is nothing but your own arrogance.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

No. Heterosexual is in the majority, so when the person is neutral, assume straight.

 

[RadiusXd]

no, it's not wrong.
i cant be asking everyone when i meet them, and i certainly can't assume they are all gay.

 

[sanomaton]

I like to assume nothing. Being bisexual is so "in" right now it's hard to tell whether people are bi or gay or straight or perhaps nothing at all.

But I guess it's not wrong to assume someone is straight...

 

[RadiusXd]

As a few others have said, yes it is wrong to presume.

If I'm interviewing candidates for a job and I know from past experience that most women don't have enough experience for the job, does that make it right to presume any woman applying can't be a good enough candidate, so dismiss her automatically?
Of course not. I can gain precise information easily just by asking and nothing is gained by presuming either way.

The same is true of someone sexuality, you gain nothing by presuming either way and, if you really must know, you can gain the information easily by asking, so why presume at all? If you presume, you're right 90% of the time, but if you don't presume at all, you're right 100%.

Yes, in life there are times when you have to make presumptions, otherwise things won't work out very well but this isn't one of those times. This is a time when the presumption is nothing but your own arrogance.

i can think of a reason to not ask, plenty of people don't take too kindly to having their sexual orientation questioned. many of whom appear steroid infused.

 

[Twilight_guy]

No. People define the world in terms of the "self" and the "other." The self is things you identify with and that generally means people who look and, act and think like you. You will tend to project your notion of "self" onto others if you identify them as part of your group and have to fill in unspecified holes in their personality. (such as your probably straight so you assume most people you meet are to unless they do something to categorize themselves into the "gay" other category). As an interesting note: if you see two men together and obviously in a relationship do you automatically assume they are both gay? Did you consider one or both of them might be bisexual? isn't it odd that gay seems more prevalent in our mind then other non-straight groups?

 

[GroovyV]

It isn't wrong at all, but you should know better than to take an assumption and run with it.
Gotta be careful.
I've had an experience, 2 actually, with dudes i knew who i thought, FOR SURE, were gay.
They were just flamboyant.
Didn't get a chance to put my foot in my mouth though. Let my classmates do that for me.

 

[Merkavar]

i just dont think it should be an issue. the person should just correct them if its an issue for them.

 

[Maze1125]

As a few others have said, yes it is wrong to presume.

If I'm interviewing candidates for a job and I know from past experience that most women don't have enough experience for the job, does that make it right to presume any woman applying can't be a good enough candidate, so dismiss her automatically?
Of course not. I can gain precise information easily just by asking and nothing is gained by presuming either way.

The same is true of someone sexuality, you gain nothing by presuming either way and, if you really must know, you can gain the information easily by asking, so why presume at all? If you presume, you're right 90% of the time, but if you don't presume at all, you're right 100%.

Yes, in life there are times when you have to make presumptions, otherwise things won't work out very well but this isn't one of those times. This is a time when the presumption is nothing but your own arrogance.

i can think of a reason to not ask, plenty of people don't take too kindly to having their sexual orientation questioned. many of whom appear steroid infused.

Okay, there's still no reason to presume either way. You may be scared to ask, but there's still nothing gained by the presumption, so why make it?

 

[zombiesinc]

Considering the majority is heterosexual, I don't think it's wrong. I try to avoid applying that assumption though (if that makes sense).

 

[Legion]

No, as long as you aren't intrusive about it. I assume that everyone is a blank slate in that department until they give me a reason to think otherwise to be honest.

Considering the majority is heterosexual, I don't think it's wrong. I try to avoid applying that assumption though (if that makes sense).

I think you mean the same thing as I do.

 

[similar.squirrel]

The majority of people are. Going by statistics, it's perfectly acceptable. I can't see how it matters, though. Unless you're romantically interested in the individual concerned.

 

[Yokai]

Nope, it's not wrong. It's the same as if you were to assume an American you just met was probably Protestant or nonreligious, simply because those are the most common denominations. I've never met anyone of a minority that wasn't immediately obvious who was offended when people assumed they were something else. It's not that big of an issue.

 

[The Maddest March Hare]

No, the ignorant thing would be changing your opinion on them as a person when you find out otherwise.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Not really assumtions don't really mean anything, sexuality rarely gets discussed between people that don't know the others interests for a fact.

It's no different from hair colour, a lot of people don't have black hair, but that still doesn't change the fact that black hair is the predominant hair colour in humans

 

[MrFluffy-X]

Nope its natural and the norm

 

[Varrdy]

I'd say "yes" on principle...

I say it's wrong because it's always wrong to assume anything about anyone, really. It's wrong to assume that all African-Americans are "Gangstas" in the same way that it's wrong to assume all girls like pink / ponies / pink ponies and that all men are bastards. OK sometimes assumptions can be justified but the circumstances have to be exceptional and by and large, assumptions are based on lame generalisations at best and often lead to unfair "pigeonholing" of individual people.

That said, society is slowly starting to realise that the lines between stereotypes are getting blurry. Several of my gay friends (I'm a fur - I'd say that over 75% of my mates are gay as a result!) are camp as you like but there are just as many who you'd never imagine as being gay in a million years if you were to meet them. This goes for both genders, by the way...

In short, while it's not nice to assume anything about anyone, nobody in their right mind is going to go to war on you for assuming they are straight until proved otherwise. It's a real stretch to call it ignorant or offensive unless one doesn't let it rest when they have their assumptions proved wrong.

As far as I know, every gay / lesbian / bi person I know has never really cared when / if people assume they are straight until told otherwise. It's how the person reacts after learning the truth that matters.

Wardy