A "gay vibe"? Duh. Gay cliché vibe, more like it.

But they're not a couple. Couples don't sell things to each other to raise cash.

I was going to post the exact same thing, why would he have to sell his watch to his partner?

I think it speaks to certain segments of the population oerwhelming desire to see gays normalized, they were going for a 'buddy' style vibe with the obvious hindrence of one selling the other something, and people still reached down deep and pulled out the gay, or at least the gay they wanted to see. Point reinforced in the article with the mention of the two girl ad they started running after noticing the gay hit of the first.

Personally, I'm all for it, I could care less. I support gay marriage on simple anti-discrimination issues, has nothing to do with morality for me, it's even a Constitutional matter as far as I'm concerned.

But to pull gay out of that ad is to say any ad with two guys interacting in any way is gay. I think it's wishful thinking on some peoples parts.

marcparis:

A "gay vibe"? Duh. Gay cliché vibe, more like it.

But they're not a couple. Couples don't sell things to each other to raise cash.

I didn't pick up any "gay vibe" but I'm pretty oblivious to that anyways. But I disagree about couples selling each other things; I don't know how healthy it is relationship-wise but I've known several couples who kept their finances and possessions completely separated. I think it mostly stemmed from going through a bad break up or divorce in the past and having to reconcile years worth of finances and big purchases.

KB01: But I disagree about couples selling each other things; I don't know how healthy it is relationship-wise but I've known several couples who kept their finances and possessions completely separated. I think it mostly stemmed from going through a bad break up or divorce in the past and having to reconcile years worth of finances and big purchases.

My husband and I keep our finances completely separate and split the bills down the middle, take turns buying the gas and groceries, etc. If we are buying something for both of us or going on a vacation, we both contribute to it, but we both buy stuff for ourselves from our own money (clothes, books, etc). However, neither of us would have to sell each other a personal item if one of us needed cash and were short. Obviously, we'd talk about it and work out a solution, temporary or otherwise.

It's got nothing to do with us being "unhealthy" relationship-wise. Mostly, it's about the fact that we both had our own checking and savings accounts when we moved in together and when we got married, it was working well enough that there wasn't a reason to change anything. The bills get paid, on time, and if one of us wants to spend money on something for ourselves, there's no arguing and stuff--especially since one of us tends to be a "saver" and one of us tends to be a "spender"--because once the various obligations are covered, whatever is left in our accounts is ours to do with what we will. So, separate finances are not necessarily an indication of "unhealthy". Having to sell a personal possession to your significant other to raise money probably would be, though. So I agree -- based on that alone, I vote for "not a couple".

tkc:

KB01: But I disagree about couples selling each other things; I don't know how healthy it is relationship-wise but I've known several couples who kept their finances and possessions completely separated. I think it mostly stemmed from going through a bad break up or divorce in the past and having to reconcile years worth of finances and big purchases.

My husband and I keep our finances completely separate and split the bills down the middle, take turns buying the gas and groceries, etc. If we are buying something for both of us or going on a vacation, we both contribute to it, but we both buy stuff for ourselves from our own money (clothes, books, etc). However, neither of us would have to sell each other a personal item if one of us needed cash and were short. Obviously, we'd talk about it and work out a solution, temporary or otherwise.

It's got nothing to do with us being "unhealthy" relationship-wise. Mostly, it's about the fact that we both had our own checking and savings accounts when we moved in together and when we got married, it was working well enough that there wasn't a reason to change anything. The bills get paid, on time, and if one of us wants to spend money on something for ourselves, there's no arguing and stuff--especially since one of us tends to be a "saver" and one of us tends to be a "spender"--because once the various obligations are covered, whatever is left in our accounts is ours to do with what we will. So, separate finances are not necessarily an indication of "unhealthy". Having to sell a personal possession to your significant other to raise money probably would be, though. So I agree -- based on that alone, I vote for "not a couple".

I didn't mean to offend you or anyone. It sounds like you and your wife have a pretty good system. I was just basing my view on how some of our friends handle finances, which stem from bad divorces. They tend to view large purchases as individual possessions; he owns the TV, she owns the washer and dryer, etc.

My wife and I actually had separate finances for the first year we were married. For various reasons, including a fairly big income disparity, and just simplicity, we wound up merging everything. It actually works fairly well for us; the only real challenge is doing anything as a surprise or birthday/christmas gifts.

And sorry again, I didn't mean to come off as such a judgmental prick!

What happens when the "spender" doesn't have their share of the rent? Or the spender can't live without a 50" LCD and the "saver" is content w/ a 19" CRT? Sectional sofa vs recliner? Danish modern vs thrift store?

Your arrangement is extremely logical and neat - I think the reason people may look at it as strange or seem "judgemental" is because most relationships aren't logical and neat.

Your arrangement to me would read as if my partner was always planning on having a neat and easy "out" if we were to split up.

Twice lately, I've been in a bar when that ad came on (without sound) and people I was with noticed it and wondered if it was a gay couple, just from the body language. It's clear as soon as you hear the dialogue that it's not a couple, but the vibe is definitely there.

Veneer of frenmity over suppressed desire?

What if they got a gay actor couple to play 2 straight friends?

Why would a straight guy bring his friend with him to buy insurance?

Wow! I wasn't the only one to think of that show!

I agree with you completely! As soon as I saw that commercial I felt that vibe, but didn't think they were a couple. Will & Grace popped up in my head. Except the more hetero guy was in place of Will and the other guy resembled Jack. I support the ad, even if it inadvertantly gave a gay vibe. It's still awesome and I like it.