Search Results: double standard

This question came up when I saw how my girlfriend acts with her female friends...

She and a friend were both wearing shorts, and the friend showed my girlfriend something on her phone, my girlfriend got close enough so that their bare legs/thighs were making some contact with her friend's bare legs/thighs, and I expected one of them to move away... but no, they just stayed in that position for 30 minutes as her friend continued to show her stuff, and they didn't seem to even mind or notice.

The same thing happened at the beach, but with a different friend... both of them were in bikinis, and they got real close together to talk, and their skin was making a lot of contact... but neither of them minded.

I was pretty surprised at this, because guys would never let this happen, at the fear of being called "gay" or whatever.

When I confronted my girlfriend about this, she seemed confused, and asked me "why would it matter?" I told her that if guys did it it'd be seen as gay, but it's somehow okay between girls. And she said that the double standard is pretty awful, and that the skin contact for her is a sign of friendship and intimacy, that she's sad guys don't have it.

---

TL;DR- My girlfriend doesn't give a shit if her skin touches her friend's skin. They could be super close in bikinis, a lot of skin contact, and she just doesn't care. Are most women really this touchy feely?

I'm sure people are very familiar with people losing their jobs for what they say online. Companies dont care about right and wrong; they only care about image in a word of political correctness and racial strife.

Where is the line? What criteria should be used by companies to decide who gets fired?
Should their be a double standard based on race, gender, religion... Should protected classes have free speech but everyone else be fired at will?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/harvard-grad-says-she-fired-125450691.html

Hypthetically, there's group A which believes everyone should be able to eat ice cream, and group B which thinks nobody should eat ice cream (but contradicts this by eating ice cream, themselves, while still preventing others from eating ice cream). If group A doesn't stand for the double standards and tries to prevent group B from eating ice cream in the name of equality, is group A hypocritical, since they're preventing people from eating ice cream even though they believe everyone should be able to? Or is it different when you believe something, but it's application is being obstructed, and then you try to employ equality until your belief is later attainable? Otherwise, group A will just continue to believe everyone should be able to eat ice cream, but being unable to employ that system due to group B, all the while group B is hypocritically eating ice cream? In one option, no one eats ice cream, in the other option only the hypocrits eat the ice cream.