@jonsblond – basically, every time I’ve ever heard of man code/man law/guy code/guy law/whateveryouwannacallit, it’s been in jest. These laws were created as a joke, kind of like “real men don’t eat quiche”. It’s basically meant to appeal to the inner boy who longs for the good old days when men were “real men”. Basically the frat boy, “boys will be boys” mentality. I have yet to hear anyone who took it seriously, because clearly even the people who came up with it were smart enough to realize that it was macho bullshit, basically posturing, celebrating the worst parts of male behavior. Pretty much the idea that real men are assholes who do whatever they want, but the most important thing is to appear like a real man…you act like a man so people will treat you like a man and think of you as a man. None of this touchy feely metrosexual crap.
So here comes @NaturalMineralWater in another thread pretty much saying that it’s “gay” for two male friends to sit next to each other at a fricking movie, because it goes against the man code. Well, he didn’t count on two homosexuals, me and all the other people here who just don’t put up with narrow-minded bullshit. Several of us make it clear that it’s asinine and juvenile (not to mention homophobic) to try to discern someone’s sexuality by the simple fact that they sit next to another guy. So he got called on it, and starts to become all defensive about this guy code and comes over here and starts his own “guy code” thread, thinking that there obviously HAVE to be others who live their lives by this joke. And to make matters worse, he pulls out the “I’m not a homophobe, but…and we all know that when you follow up “I’m not a” with a “but”, 999 times out of 1,000 it means you are. Then he goes as far as to charactarize homosexuality as a choice, which logically if it is, then his heterosexuality is a choice then isn’t it? Wouldn’t that mean he could be gay if he wanted to? But we try to piont out how ignorant, prejudiced and just plain wrong he is, an dhow much of a joke it would be for someone to live their life by a “guy code”, which is an honest answer to the question he asked, he decides to stop following his own question.
So if this question had been in jest, just guys wanting to riff on “guy code”, that would have been one thing, but he wanted to engage in a real bona fide philosophical discussion about why it’s OK to live your life by some neanderthal joke code, and seemed to think that by just telling us he’s not what he clearly is, we’d leave him alone.