Actually, it's probably a reference to the fact there was no reason for our characters to beam over to that ship other than 'look at the lesbians, see players, aren't we progressive!'. Alas for Cryptic, it's fallen flat.
Yeah, just like in Delta Flight how there was no reason to beam over to Miral's ship other than to have Miral's heterosexuality thrown in our faces.
Oh, wait, no, that's right, nobody seemed to notice or care about that, because it was just part of a fairly generic "getting to know you/briefing" scene. If you you were bothered by the House Pegh scene, but not by the Delta Flight scene, that's something to maybe examine. The issue here as I see it is not that Cryptic baited controversy with an attempt to appear progressive, it's that we still have people who regard even the mere acknowledgement of LGBT people as a radical act. If this were a heterosexual couple, it would be a total non-issue, just another bit of background world building, like Miral's past with whatshisname (Andrew?). Cryptic treated both relationships as more or less the same. If one "felt" different to someone, that's on them, not Cryptic.
Nah, plenty of people in the other thread are worried about evil liberal agendas forcing their corrupt ideas into their children's minds.
I guess it's always one of the advantages of the conservatives to say "Why show something different, what we got now and want to conserve worked for so long". No one would dare to argue that showing a status quo is also "forcing" a (conservative) agenda...
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
(Just out of curiosity, why should I assume they were lesbians, if its the two female klingons in House Pegh you are talking about?)
- They could be sisters.
- They could be roommates.
- They could be from the same home town.
- They could just be supportive acquaintances.
- They could have gone to school together.
- Several other possibilities...
I saw nothing to indicate either their gender identity or sexual practices beyond the usual inference of Klingon Sexual behavior which I know little about but I understand to be aggressive and somewhat animalistic.
I liked the story. I liked those two characters, too. I liked the whole episode. I am not overly concerned with the prospective sexual identity or preferences of any of the characters involved, as far as I am concerned what they do is their own business and not germain to stopping the Iconians.
One of the forum "super moderators" had the gall to post in the official thread that the LGBT couple was "inappropriate" because the game is rated "t for teen" and minors play it.
Frankly it's the most bigoted, insulting thing anyone posted in the whole thread.
One of the forum "super moderators" had the gall to post in the official thread that the LGBT couple was "inappropriate" because the game is rated "t for teen" and minors play it.
Frankly it's the most bigoted, insulting thing anyone posted in the whole thread.
Please don't make this a matter revolving around specific users. I am sure the issue in questions will be dealt with, but don't go around and post "Everybody! This moderator posted this!". This is way too much ammunition to shoot down the whole thing because of personal flaming and end this debate - frankly, a debate that we shouldn't even have. But well *sighs*
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Would this be the first relationship STO has introduced? Can someone point to another? I have been trying to think of one and cannot! I can be missing it.
As a Klingon, you bring the news of his dead mate to a Klingon that ends up becoming your BOFF. Not sure who it was? D'Vak? Of course, we never get to see them together, due to the sad occassion.
We also meet Neelix and his wife (or is it still girlfriend?) in the Delta Quadrant.
But again, my main issue is that is entirely unnecessary and her protectiveness of her mate comes across as unreasonable, as the moment her mate is in danger she will ditch everything and save her, that attitude in the military is simply NOT TOLERATED and one of the reasons why they allow people in relationships to server together (even bothers, I am putting familiar relationships as well) if they can avoid since it can negatively impact on how they will react under stress.
Maybe not in real life, but in Star Trek, it is.
Picard may have ended a relationship because of the conflict of interest, but Jadzia and Worf did not. It was even the plot point of an episode, where Worf abandonded the mission for his wife. They got into trouble for it, but it was not much more than a slap on the wrist. They still served together until her death.
It may be unrealistic or not how we do it today, but it is different in Star Trek.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Indeed. There was no reason to visit that klingon bridge, such banal communications didn't require a character to be beamed over. There are better ways to introduce new npcs, regardless of their relationships. This is not one of them.
Normally the inclusion of a same sex couple would b
Banal communication?
We changed the mission from "Hey, let's blow up those Omega Molecules, even if we destroy the whole star system and the surrounding area for warp travel" to "Let'S try to avoid a catastrophe while we do our thing!"
Not banal at all.
The whole Delta Flight pre-beam meet-up was more banal, it was just a presentation of some NPCs which we don't need to know to do the mission, which was straightforward defined.
OF course, maybe you also found that banal. But I'd say that any part where our character (at least in the fiction, it's not like was players get much say here) makes meaningful decisions is not banal.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
Just remember that each of us also possesses the right to object and voice that objection without retaliation.
Depends on what you define as retaliation, I suppose. Sure, people have a right to voice their objections, but then so too do the people who object to those objections. Having objections responded to (or even criticized) is not the same thing as retaliation, even if it is uncomfortable to experience. Saying "This is just what I believe" is not a shield that should protect those beliefs from critical examination.
(Just out of curiosity, why should I assume they were lesbians, if its the two female klingons in House Pegh you are talking about?)
- They could be sisters.
- They could be roommates.
- They could be from the same home town.
- They could just be supportive acquaintances.
- They could have gone to school together.
- Several other possibilities...
I saw nothing to indicate either their gender identity or sexual practices beyond the usual inference of Klingon Sexual behavior which I know little about but I understand to be aggressive and somewhat animalistic.
I liked the story. I liked those two characters, too. I liked the whole episode. I am not overly concerned with the prospective sexual identity or preferences of any of the characters involved, as far as I am concerned what they do is their own business and not germain to stopping the Iconians.
I replayed it early this morning and thought the same thing myself.
My mother always told me to walk away from a fight, The Marines taught me how.
Just remember that each of us also possesses the right to object and voice that objection without retaliation.
Yes and no. Remember, there is no such thing as Free speech on somebody else's server where you have to submit to their rules to be able to post.
Just a fyi.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
I can see one very good reason to beam over to the Klingon ship to discuss the mission parameters.
Subspace communications may be good - but we've seen before that they are not perfect. In fact, that was a plot point in the TOS episode "The Deadly Years" - Kirk ordered the use of a code they knew the Romulans had broken, in order to pull his "Corbomite self-destruct system" trick again.
If we're planning an assault against an Iconian base, and we know that the Iconians have technology that makes ours look like kids playing with Lego, damn betcha I'm going to want to discuss plans for that assault face-to-face, not via intership communications (that might be intercepted). At least this way if there's a leak, we've cut the number of suspects down to those in the room at the time.
TRIBBLE Klingons ? Good for them, but who cares. It would be great if people could just acknowledge facts about other people without making a fuss about it. I'm actually amazed that people actually waste their time arguing about "TRIBBLE things", that`s so 1990...... :rolleyes:
I can see one very good reason to beam over to the Klingon ship to discuss the mission parameters.
Subspace communications may be good - but we've seen before that they are not perfect. In fact, that was a plot point in the TOS episode "The Deadly Years" - Kirk ordered the use of a code they knew the Romulans had broken, in order to pull his "Corbomite self-destruct system" trick again.
If we're planning an assault against an Iconian base, and we know that the Iconians have technology that makes ours look like kids playing with Lego, damn betcha I'm going to want to discuss plans for that assault face-to-face, not via intership communications (that might be intercepted). At least this way if there's a leak, we've cut the number of suspects down to those in the room at the time.
Even without arguing in-lore, people can't seriously bash a brief moment of not pulling the trigger in a mission and just a sentence later ask for more meaningful, non combat content in STO.
Beaming over to the ship was interacting with the Klingon House Pegh personnel, just as it was with the Delta Flight bunch, just as it is with D'Tan beaming down speaking to him etc. - and I cannot take people seriously building some kind of political agenda out of the house pegh mission with that reasoning.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
You know, this isn't the first time there has been a homosexual relationship in this game. Anyone remember the Celes System patrol? It's an early Starfleet one where you beam down to a station to find a saboteur only to discover the CO of the station, Commander Thiral, is responsible. Why is this a big deal?
I quote:
My bondmate was deep in debt with the Syndicate. I agreed to help them in exchange for letting him go free.
That is dialog straight from the mission. Commander Thiral is a male Andorian, so this indicates it is a homosexual relationship.
Then of course there is the strip club portion of Nimbus, with a male customer drooling over a male dancer. Yes, that isn't a relationship, but it's at least one other male homosexual character in the game.
The whole point of this mini rant is just to say that there is precedent in the game for homosexual characters. So it's not like these new characters are anything new, the game isn't all of a sudden out of nowhere trying to force homosexual characters on the players.
Perhaps that's the problem right there: "lifestyle."
It's not a "lifestyle."
And there's no reason to project the values of the Human Abrahamic Tradition onto other species like Klingons. In Romulan language circles, there is a word for "homosexual" which is explicitly noted as "not an insult." Seems like Romulans are fine with it. As for no previous portrayals, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Not having seen it before is not justification for assuming it doesn't exist.
My only real complaint with the story of this mission is that we all ran away after the Iconian was weakened, rather than finishing the blasted thing off.
My take of Klingon culture from watching the TV series and movies has been one of masculinity, since the majority of instances has dealt with power struggles among the males. As another poster mentioned Jadzia's comment, the Klingon people are as diverse as any other. I think that this lack of viewing or reading of this diversity has made me think that Klingons were not like that; however, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", and it is possible to have such characters in the Klingon culture. I do feel that stereotypical TRIBBLE portrayals of these characters was unnecessary; they are Klingon warriors and should be represented as such. As others have mentioned, they are characters in a bigger story than their own. Having a character pointing out that one is the mate of the other was unnecessary if their relationship is typical in Klingon culture even if one was more protective than the other. If anything, one of the two female Klingons should have stated, if story called for it, that the two were mates.
I do hope to see more sexual diversity among the Klingons in upcoming episodes with hopes that they will be warriors and not stereotypes of pop media's view on people of various sexual orientations should be preceived.
Could care less about sexual orientation of people. Most of us don't want to know. When ya shove in our face, that is when most of us get quite angry.
Good thing it's not being shoved in your face in this story, then, isn't it?
Velqua, the fact that you think "aggression" and "masculinity" are irretrievably synonymous says more about you than Klingons, I think.
Sle, that's not really a good example - apparently we're keeping the soft-canon idea that Andorian marriages involve four members, due to a rather complex reproductive method (that frequently threatens their species' very existence, which tells us that either the pattern is common on Andoria, or there is a dearth of competitors for the position of apex predator). Sure, it's an example of sorts, but the gent you cite in the Orion nightclub on Nimbus III is a better one, IMO.
My take of Klingon culture from watching the TV series and movies has been one of masculinity, since the majority of instances has dealt with power struggles among the males. As another poster mentioned Jadzia's comment, the Klingon people are as diverse as any other. I think that this lack of viewing or reading of this diversity has made me think that Klingons were not like that; however, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", and it is possible to have such characters in the Klingon culture. I do feel that stereotypical TRIBBLE portrayals of these characters was unnecessary; they are Klingon warriors and should be represented as such. As others have mentioned, they are characters in a bigger story than their own. Having a character pointing out that one is the mate of the other was unnecessary if their relationship is typical in Klingon culture even if one was more protective than the other. If anything, one of the two female Klingons should have stated, if story called for it, that the two were mates.
I do hope to see more sexual diversity among the Klingons in upcoming episodes with hopes that they will be warriors and not stereotypes of pop media's view on people of various sexual orientations should be preceived.
I could see the mate warning happening just as much as if it was a heterosexual couple. Maybe the male is very jealous and the female very attractive and he tends to start fights over it. So the commander is trying to head off trouble so we can focus on the mission.
I think we have seen a fair amount of tough female warriors in the various series. I am thinking most particularly of the time when Riker serves on the Klingon ship. Here we see female warriors alongside males and seemingly of equal toughness. There is the sexism of the high council, true, but amongst warriors it seems pretty egalitarian.
For me canon is very important. In this case I would say the canon is pretty much silent about TRIBBLE Klingons.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: "We think we've come so far. Torture of heretics, burning of witches, it's all ancient history. Then - before you can blink an eye - suddenly it threatens to start all over again."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Jonathan Frakes was reportedly disappointed because producers put the kibosh on his idea that the alien he was making out with would turn out to be male.
My issue with them is that one called me a petaq even though I outranked her. I should have considered that a challenge and killed her when playing on the KDF side. lol
_____
Lifetime no longer gives a forum title. That should be updated on the Lifetime page that mentions what you get. PMing the CSR doesn't work neither.
What I got from this thread is that there must be reason for there to be a same sex couple in the mission and that it must be intertwined with the story in some way, but if this were a Heterosexual couple then no one would question it, it's interesting that as soon as you change what could have been a Heterosexual couple into a same sex one the mission goes from being about the story to being all about the gross TRIBBLE couple.
Did Cryptic drag everyone's attention to the TRIBBLE Klingons or is it the players giving it too much attention? why must there be a reason for them being a couple, a Heterosexual couple wouldn't need explication so why do they?
For me, it seemed a little out of place because of the way Klingons tend to be feudal in their society and culture, focusing more on the bloodline--as others have state--and being reluctant to have women in positions of power. As I posted earlier, there is a reference where Jadzia said in a DS9 episode that the Klingon people were as diverse as any other. With that I can see it is not far-fetched as this Klingon feudal society leads me to believe. It would be nice to see some these relationships explored in further episodes so that we--the players--get to see how diverse the Klingon culture truly is.
Not every bloodline or house will be prestigious, and there are lots of people not from noble houses. They might have a low more allowances in this regard.
And we've seen that Klingons also have no real issues with interracial marriages. (Worf was part of the House of Martok when he married Dax, and Martok's wife mostly seemed to oppose Jadzia based on her personality, even if some racism might also have played into it. B'elena was half-Klingon).
Also... With the technology available to the Klingons, I would not be surprised if a bloodline could "survive" a homosexual marriage.
Not to mention that some "bloodlines" aren'T bloodlines at all, like aformentioned Martok's wife family name was based on a family that had died out, but other Klingons took on the name to pretend the bloodline kept on - which was something that Jadzia could figure out without needing to do any top secret espionage missions apparently...
This is something I would like to explore in a future episode where we get to meet some of these non-prestigious houses and see how they live. How diverse are the Klingons? What limitations or restrictions do they impose upon their people as whole and culture? What is taboo for them? Why do those who go against these taboos and cultural pillars do so?
Could care less about sexual orientation of people. Most of us don't want to know. When ya shove in our face, that is when most of us get quite angry.
I agree. However, someone made a good point once that I had not really thought much about before, but now realize it is true.
The point was that a lot of the times, when people say "shove it it our face" like you did, all they are really talking about is the *normal* things that straight couples do. Have pictures of their partners on their desk at work, a hug or kiss(brief, not prolonged) in public, etc. For many people, they pay absolutely no attention when a straight couple does those things, but when a TRIBBLE couple does them they think it is "shoving it in their face".
To be clear, I do not like to see the kind of "get a room" displays from ANY couples in public; whether they are straight or TRIBBLE makes no difference. However, I do agree that there is a double standard between what is considered "normal behavior" for a straight couple vs a TRIBBLE couple.
Comments
Yeah, just like in Delta Flight how there was no reason to beam over to Miral's ship other than to have Miral's heterosexuality thrown in our faces.
Oh, wait, no, that's right, nobody seemed to notice or care about that, because it was just part of a fairly generic "getting to know you/briefing" scene. If you you were bothered by the House Pegh scene, but not by the Delta Flight scene, that's something to maybe examine. The issue here as I see it is not that Cryptic baited controversy with an attempt to appear progressive, it's that we still have people who regard even the mere acknowledgement of LGBT people as a radical act. If this were a heterosexual couple, it would be a total non-issue, just another bit of background world building, like Miral's past with whatshisname (Andrew?). Cryptic treated both relationships as more or less the same. If one "felt" different to someone, that's on them, not Cryptic.
I guess it's always one of the advantages of the conservatives to say "Why show something different, what we got now and want to conserve worked for so long". No one would dare to argue that showing a status quo is also "forcing" a (conservative) agenda...
- They could be sisters.
- They could be roommates.
- They could be from the same home town.
- They could just be supportive acquaintances.
- They could have gone to school together.
- Several other possibilities...
I saw nothing to indicate either their gender identity or sexual practices beyond the usual inference of Klingon Sexual behavior which I know little about but I understand to be aggressive and somewhat animalistic.
I liked the story. I liked those two characters, too. I liked the whole episode. I am not overly concerned with the prospective sexual identity or preferences of any of the characters involved, as far as I am concerned what they do is their own business and not germain to stopping the Iconians.
Quickly! Lock your Sons and Daughters away!
They Gays are coming! :rolleyes:
Please don't make this a matter revolving around specific users. I am sure the issue in questions will be dealt with, but don't go around and post "Everybody! This moderator posted this!". This is way too much ammunition to shoot down the whole thing because of personal flaming and end this debate - frankly, a debate that we shouldn't even have. But well *sighs*
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
As a Klingon, you bring the news of his dead mate to a Klingon that ends up becoming your BOFF. Not sure who it was? D'Vak? Of course, we never get to see them together, due to the sad occassion.
We also meet Neelix and his wife (or is it still girlfriend?) in the Delta Quadrant.
Maybe not in real life, but in Star Trek, it is.
Picard may have ended a relationship because of the conflict of interest, but Jadzia and Worf did not. It was even the plot point of an episode, where Worf abandonded the mission for his wife. They got into trouble for it, but it was not much more than a slap on the wrist. They still served together until her death.
It may be unrealistic or not how we do it today, but it is different in Star Trek.
Banal communication?
We changed the mission from "Hey, let's blow up those Omega Molecules, even if we destroy the whole star system and the surrounding area for warp travel" to "Let'S try to avoid a catastrophe while we do our thing!"
Not banal at all.
The whole Delta Flight pre-beam meet-up was more banal, it was just a presentation of some NPCs which we don't need to know to do the mission, which was straightforward defined.
OF course, maybe you also found that banal. But I'd say that any part where our character (at least in the fiction, it's not like was players get much say here) makes meaningful decisions is not banal.
Depends on what you define as retaliation, I suppose. Sure, people have a right to voice their objections, but then so too do the people who object to those objections. Having objections responded to (or even criticized) is not the same thing as retaliation, even if it is uncomfortable to experience. Saying "This is just what I believe" is not a shield that should protect those beliefs from critical examination.
I replayed it early this morning and thought the same thing myself.
Yes and no. Remember, there is no such thing as Free speech on somebody else's server where you have to submit to their rules to be able to post.
Just a fyi.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Subspace communications may be good - but we've seen before that they are not perfect. In fact, that was a plot point in the TOS episode "The Deadly Years" - Kirk ordered the use of a code they knew the Romulans had broken, in order to pull his "Corbomite self-destruct system" trick again.
If we're planning an assault against an Iconian base, and we know that the Iconians have technology that makes ours look like kids playing with Lego, damn betcha I'm going to want to discuss plans for that assault face-to-face, not via intership communications (that might be intercepted). At least this way if there's a leak, we've cut the number of suspects down to those in the room at the time.
Even without arguing in-lore, people can't seriously bash a brief moment of not pulling the trigger in a mission and just a sentence later ask for more meaningful, non combat content in STO.
Beaming over to the ship was interacting with the Klingon House Pegh personnel, just as it was with the Delta Flight bunch, just as it is with D'Tan beaming down speaking to him etc. - and I cannot take people seriously building some kind of political agenda out of the house pegh mission with that reasoning.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I quote: That is dialog straight from the mission. Commander Thiral is a male Andorian, so this indicates it is a homosexual relationship.
Then of course there is the strip club portion of Nimbus, with a male customer drooling over a male dancer. Yes, that isn't a relationship, but it's at least one other male homosexual character in the game.
The whole point of this mini rant is just to say that there is precedent in the game for homosexual characters. So it's not like these new characters are anything new, the game isn't all of a sudden out of nowhere trying to force homosexual characters on the players.
My take of Klingon culture from watching the TV series and movies has been one of masculinity, since the majority of instances has dealt with power struggles among the males. As another poster mentioned Jadzia's comment, the Klingon people are as diverse as any other. I think that this lack of viewing or reading of this diversity has made me think that Klingons were not like that; however, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", and it is possible to have such characters in the Klingon culture. I do feel that stereotypical TRIBBLE portrayals of these characters was unnecessary; they are Klingon warriors and should be represented as such. As others have mentioned, they are characters in a bigger story than their own. Having a character pointing out that one is the mate of the other was unnecessary if their relationship is typical in Klingon culture even if one was more protective than the other. If anything, one of the two female Klingons should have stated, if story called for it, that the two were mates.
I do hope to see more sexual diversity among the Klingons in upcoming episodes with hopes that they will be warriors and not stereotypes of pop media's view on people of various sexual orientations should be preceived.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708588/
Velqua, the fact that you think "aggression" and "masculinity" are irretrievably synonymous says more about you than Klingons, I think.
Sle, that's not really a good example - apparently we're keeping the soft-canon idea that Andorian marriages involve four members, due to a rather complex reproductive method (that frequently threatens their species' very existence, which tells us that either the pattern is common on Andoria, or there is a dearth of competitors for the position of apex predator). Sure, it's an example of sorts, but the gent you cite in the Orion nightclub on Nimbus III is a better one, IMO.
I could see the mate warning happening just as much as if it was a heterosexual couple. Maybe the male is very jealous and the female very attractive and he tends to start fights over it. So the commander is trying to head off trouble so we can focus on the mission.
I think we have seen a fair amount of tough female warriors in the various series. I am thinking most particularly of the time when Riker serves on the Klingon ship. Here we see female warriors alongside males and seemingly of equal toughness. There is the sexism of the high council, true, but amongst warriors it seems pretty egalitarian.
For me canon is very important. In this case I would say the canon is pretty much silent about TRIBBLE Klingons.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
Lifetime no longer gives a forum title. That should be updated on the Lifetime page that mentions what you get. PMing the CSR doesn't work neither.
For me, it seemed a little out of place because of the way Klingons tend to be feudal in their society and culture, focusing more on the bloodline--as others have state--and being reluctant to have women in positions of power. As I posted earlier, there is a reference where Jadzia said in a DS9 episode that the Klingon people were as diverse as any other. With that I can see it is not far-fetched as this Klingon feudal society leads me to believe. It would be nice to see some these relationships explored in further episodes so that we--the players--get to see how diverse the Klingon culture truly is.
This is something I would like to explore in a future episode where we get to meet some of these non-prestigious houses and see how they live. How diverse are the Klingons? What limitations or restrictions do they impose upon their people as whole and culture? What is taboo for them? Why do those who go against these taboos and cultural pillars do so?
I agree. However, someone made a good point once that I had not really thought much about before, but now realize it is true.
The point was that a lot of the times, when people say "shove it it our face" like you did, all they are really talking about is the *normal* things that straight couples do. Have pictures of their partners on their desk at work, a hug or kiss(brief, not prolonged) in public, etc. For many people, they pay absolutely no attention when a straight couple does those things, but when a TRIBBLE couple does them they think it is "shoving it in their face".
To be clear, I do not like to see the kind of "get a room" displays from ANY couples in public; whether they are straight or TRIBBLE makes no difference. However, I do agree that there is a double standard between what is considered "normal behavior" for a straight couple vs a TRIBBLE couple.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008