What do [+] and [=] mean in someone’s profile?

I admit, the first time I say a profile with [+] attached to the name, I was confused.  Coming from the tech world, a box with a + in it means “closed tree control, click to expand and see content”.

Turns out, though, that this is a handy bit of flagging.

“Flagging” is any sort of non-verbal method for indicating preferences, status, or identity.  It is best known in the gay community via a colored bandana stuck in the back pocket to indicate kink activities, but it goes way deeper.  Hanging your keys from a belt loop indicates top or bottom.  The type of flowers held in a bouquet indicates feeling and availability, as does the specific color of roses.  The online bear community has a coded string of letters and numbers to indicate a large about of sexual and physical details.  Even Queen Elizabeth “flags” with her purse, they say.

One newer revision of the classic hanky code includes a flag for being trans — not for what you are into, but what you are.  This would be an identity flag, one used for disclosing information which might otherwise be difficult to verbally express — for various reasons, including personal security.   (Thanks to Shilo for showing me this one.)

[+] and [=] are also identity flags.  [+] is used to indicate HIV-positive status.  This sometimes also shows up as [+u] for “poz undetectable”, meaning HIV+ and on meds with an “undetectable” viral load, which recent studies have shown to be heavily unlikely to be at risk of transmitting the virus.

[=] is used to indicate “on PrEP” (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis), meaning someone who is HIV- and on a daily regimen of Truvada as protection against HIV infection.  While intended especially to be used in conjunction with condoms, studies have shown PrEP alone to be highly effective in preventing seroconversion.  (And thus combined with known [+u] partners, even more effective.)

As with any discussion of these subjects, a few things should be remembered:

• HIV meds and PrEP may massively reduce the risk of infection, but risk does still exist.  (Condoms also massively reduce the risk but do not remove it completely — they break, etc.)
• “HIV-” and “undetectable” are only as good as the last test.  Status can change between tests.
• Those terms are also only good if someone is honest.  Just as there are poz guys who simply don’t know it or who will lie and say they are negative if it means you will have sex with them, there are unquestionably also guys who aren’t stable on their meds or are lying about being on them at all.
• [+u] and [=] reduce the risk of transmission of HIV and only HIV.  Not HPV, HEP, gonorrhea, syphilis, chlamydia, etc.  (However, people who are on the meds and getting tested regularly will tend to have infections discovered and treated sooner, which may reduce both spread and intensity.)

I have even recently seen [=] guys saying that they prefer to only play with poz guys.  Not too many years ago, this would have indicated a “bug chaser”, but today, it is a new version of “serosorting” — reducing your risk by playing with the guys most likely to actually know their status and be in treatment.  Quite the change on that front, eh?

What does “HWP” mean? What does “Fit” mean?

These two terms show up in profiles fairly often.  “HWP” seems to have peaked and fallen off in popularity in recent years, supplanted by the somewhat more exact “fit”.

What does “HWP” mean?

“HWP” is short for “Height/Weight Proportionate”.

In theory, it is a shorthand way of saying “In good (enough) shape” — someone who isn’t scrawny skinny or fat.  In actual use, of course, it gets used to mean “In (really) good shape”, anything from “no tummy” to “no body fat at all”.

It probably encompasses “really good shape” variants like ripped, chiseled, buffed, and muscled, although those are usually specific enough states that if that is what someone is actually looking for, they will say so rather than using a hazier term like “HWP”.

The snark in me, of course, says that all heights and weights are proportionate.  It’s just that 2:1 (tall and super skinny) and 1:2 (short and round) aren’t the ratios being looked for by these people.

What does “Fit” mean?

With the term “fit”, it is the same issue, but at least its body consciousness is worn more up front.  No one is going to dub a guy over 40 with softness around the middle as “fit”.  (Even if he is technically just fine, health-wise for this age.)

Are they negative terms?

I am of a split mind on this.

In general, “HWP” and “fit” mean “Those without actively used gym memberships need not apply.”

Much of queer theory seems to be about finding the places and ways that the GLBTQ community (and society as a whole) is mean — where “mean” has three meanings: unkind, average, and poor quality.  As such, anything — anything! — which someone (anyone, include a queer strawman) could take negatively must be bad.  That includes any form of labeling and comparison of subjective qualities.  By disinviting people who don’t measure up to an arbitrary (and really, unspecified) standard, those people are put aside, put down, said to be lesser.

On the other hand, how can you express a physical (or mental, or spiritual) preference without shorthand labeling and comparison?  What is behind the use of “HWP” or “fit”?  Probably a desire for shared activities, a level of physical prowess, an avoidance of the health and social issues which people not “HWP”/not “fit” experience… and admittedly, a perhaps shallow focus on looks.  To get those concepts across, you either use shorthand idioms (like “HWP”), or you write a paragraph of prose which will make people skip over the profile.

(I know for myself, while I don’t use those terms in my profiles, I do pay attention to height/weight listings, looking for play or romantic partners who are “close enough” to my build.  If they are shorter yet heavier, or taller yet lighter, I know that the likelihood of a good match decreases a lot.  I admit it, I am looking for “HWP” in some form.)

In the end, I have to draw a difference between perhaps shallow “lookist” labeling of this sort and truly socially unacceptable ways of stating a preference (like the profile I saw recently that said “No blacks or Asians (not racist, just don’t like ethnic)”) or the ridiculously limiting ones (“Be between 27 and 29”).  “HWP” and “fit” can be used negatively, and certainly can be read than way, but the terms are not inherently bad.

(Yeah, I know queer theory mavens will go off on me for stuff in this post.  Thanks, but references to Foccault, repressed patriarchy, and emotional intelligence put me to sleep.  No need to share.)

What is the difference between a “whore”, a “tramp”, and a “slut”?

A slut sleeps with everyone.

A tramp sleeps with everyone but you.

A whore charges.

---

(I consider “slut” to be a compliment.  But don’t call me a ”whore”, I give it away.)

What does “Woof!” mean?

“Woof!” is a greeting, especially in the bear community, generally meaning “Hi, I think you’re hot!”  It is the verbal (or in online chat, textual) version of a wink/smile/tug.

(Why do bears say “woof”?  The most likely answer is that the snurfling sound a real bear makes can be written as “whurf” — half growl and half snort — which easily transcribe into “woof”.  Alternately, start from the greeting “Yo, dawg!” and follow that path to get to the same destination.)

Of course, one person’s “Hi, I think you’re hot” can be another person’s “Hi, I think you’re hot, let’s have sex now.”  Take this exchange from Adam4Adam this past weekend for example.  (Of not: the guy’s only profile picture is a side shot of his dick, and his profile text is equally sparse: “Not looking for love or anything other than getting my cock off.  Blowing a load”.  Occasionally you can check out the profile and respond to a tersely worded potential sex request.  But not with this one, and especially not when I tend to be looking for kinky fetishy sex partners and the profile indicates nothing of the sort.)

him: Woof!

me: Thanks

him: which translates as "no thanks?"

me: "Woof" doesn't usually translate as a specific offer. I'm not available until later tonight anyway.

him: yeah, good luck with that

And he blocked me.  Whatever.

If you want “Woof!” to mean more than “Hi!”, that’s great.  But you’d better be ready to follow it up with an offer and specifics.

What is “Gear”?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

What is a “Craigslist bot”?

There are two types of Craigslist bots:

Posting bots are used to post ads to Craigslist.  In theory, this is a legitimate action, allowing people to compose personal or business ads offline — perhaps several similar ads for different items — and post them with a single button click.  In practice, though, these bots are usually a form of spam, producing ads (especially personal ads) aimed to get people to reply and be directed to a website or simply have their e-mail address harvested for spam mailings.  By some estimates, as many as half the woman-seeking-man personal ads are bot posts.

Here’s a site with recommendations on how to spot these bots.

Reply bots are more clever, replying to your posts to get you to reply back, again either to harvest your e-mail address or direct you to another site which will do God knows what.  They have apparently broken the CAPTCHA security measures to access the ability to send you e-mail.

Some of the advice in that post above is helpful for spotting reply bots.  Here’s the most recent exchange I had with a reply bot, and how I could have (but didn’t) spot that it was a fake.  He replied to my post, and included a pic of a shirtless reasonably cute guy who is even wearing “gay” underwear (2(x)ist brand), saying:

i would love to meet a nice guy for a fwb situation as well. i am free today to meet. how are you? what is your name?

• You can’t judge just by fractured grammar and capitalization.  I know plenty of real people who write no better than this, especially in online cruising scenarios.  It’s like their brain isn’t what’s engaged when they are e-mailing you.
• My post said nothing about “FWB” (Friends With Benefits, aka Fuck Buddy).  It was a straight-up (ahem) kink sex post.
• His post was sent at 1:44 am on Monday.  The odds of real guys being up and posting (and not strung out on something) goes down as the hour gets later, and reduces further after midnight on Sunday.
• Although his ostensible name is “Darren”, his return address was junk: tamikapateljtvq@yahoo.com
• The name of his pic file was also junk: fxKeDPlKwD0pTnkDLiPc9wxx.jpg

After I replied back that I was interested, but that I wanted to know what he was after regarding an FWB situation, given the kink sex nature of my ad, the bot replied (with two more pics, these with reasonable names like me13.jpg):

cool :) lets do this then yea?
let me know when ur free
just do me a favor and sign up on my profile
gaysingles
its a service i use to make sure the guys i meet are safe bc ive kinda had somebad experiences in the past
just make sure you say youre over 25 and it should be free
when ur done feel free to give me a call/txt (cells on my profile)
talk to u soon

“gaysingles” was a linked URL: http://www.safelydating.net/dl77, which redirects through at least three sites to resolve to http://tracking.singlesnet.com/redirect/5974?affiliate=127328.  singlesnet.com is owned by Match.com (along with almost 37,000 other domain names).

Needless to say, once you’ve received multiple times the same boilerplate “screening” text directing you to some site you’ve never heard anyone mention before, you know it’s a bot.  But you can tell a lot earlier, if you know what to look for.

Curiously, my final reply of “You’re kidding, right?” got no further response.  Guess they got the address they wanted, and now I’ll get Viagra ads.

---

Updated on November 1, 2010

Posted a follow-up with several new bot replies.

What does “clean” mean?

“Clean”, when used in an online profile, can have two meanings.  Neither of them is “freshly showered”.

(Former) Drug Use

“Clean” is often used as part of the phrase “clean and sober”, referencing being in recovery from drug and alcohol abuse.  Used by itself, it will typically only be in reference to drug abuse (meth, heroin, cocaine, etc.), not alcohol use.  It typically is not used in regard to tobacco and marijuana (although there will be exceptions).

Of course, the only people who use the term in this way are those who are actively in recovery (or those whose lives have been so touched by drug abuse that they are part of that community by proxy, and use the terminology).  Which means that someone using “clean” in their profile this way has had a past issue with drug use; those who have no had an issue generally see no need to use the term.

(Drug and alcohol abuse and recovery are a much deeper subject than I’m covering here.  Please excuse glossing over of the details in this post.  I don’t intend to shortchange the struggles involved, but neither is it appropriate to hijack this post to delve into those details.)

(Lack of) Sexually Transmitted Diseases

The other use of “clean” is with regard to STDs, as in “clean bill of health”.  The implication here is that the individual has had a recent health screening and no STDs were found, including not just HIV but also hepatitis, HPV (venereal/anal warts), gonorrhea, and so forth.

Truth and Accuracy

As ever, what people say in their profiles and what is actually true are different things:

• Profiles may get out of date, so what was true may be months old
• Guys may have had an HIV test but not a screening for other STDs
• Some guys will list what they believe to be true, with no actual knowledge
• Some guys will lie, especially if they think they will get laid
• Recovery is a long (perhaps never ending) process, so “clean” is really “clean since date X”
• Some guys relapse, going in and out of recovery

How can you tell which usage is in effect?  You’ll have to read between the lines and perhaps engage the person in direct conversation.  Look for references to drug and alcohol use, to sexual preferences, and to the person’s involvement in the community.  (Or just come out and ask.)

As always, without assuming that anyone is actively lying, always assume the minimum: that what is in someone’s profile is what they believed was correct when they wrote it, but may not be correct now.  Use the presence of the codeword to start a conversation, not to avoid one.

What does “undetectable” mean?

Medically

In technical terms, “undetectable” (with regard to HIV infection) means that the level of HIV in the blood is below the threshhold for detection, typically below 50 parts per milliliter.  During early stages of infection and before treatment, these levels can soar into the hundreds of thousands and even millions.  With aggressive treatment, levels will settle down to the thousands, the hundreds, and below.  There is a direct connection between this level and how infectious a person is apt to be; a major goal of treatment is to keep these levels suppressed, both to reduce risks of infection and simply to keep HIV from progressing into AIDS and further compromising the individual’s immune system.

Here are two web pages for some more info:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071206220353AAVFSoz

http://www.labtestsonline.org/understanding/analytes/viral_load/test.html

Please note that I’m not a doctor nor an expert on HIV therapy, so I can’t evaluate the details of those pages.  I’m just someone who (a) pays attention and (b) wants to help decode some of the codewords people use online.

Conceptually

“Undetectable” often gets used in online profiles to indicate a person who is in a healthy, monitored state regarding his HIV infection, someone who participates in treatment.  It is intended to defuse HIV-phobia, where guys are scared to have sex with HIV-positive guys.

Risky Behaviors

As with any of the phrases I’ve been writing about, though, “undetectable” is sometimes used as a codeword, something either used or interpreted to mean something other than the technical meaning.

In this case, there is an obvious connection that gets made between “undetectable” and “not infectious”.  This is an incorrect connection, of course, because the person is not cured; he is still infectious, albeit believed to be far less so.  This incorrect connection can lead sex partners to assume that unprotected sex with such a person is “safe”.

(Of course, some people are going to read this and be all offended because they think I’ve just accused them of trying to lure HIV-negative guys into having unprotected sex with them, when they are really just trying to put their health status out there.  Calm down, boys: I’m saying that some men use “undetectable” as a codeword for that result, and that some men read that as a coded invite for unprotected sex.  If you don’t use it or read it that way, super, but don’t lie to yourself: you know some guys do.)

Of note as well is the monitoring schedule.  Just as with HIV tests, which are only accurate at the time of testing, “undetectable” was the state at testing time.  Viral load testing is done every 2–3 months, so if the person has had an immune system change, including a change of therapy, a “drug holiday”, been sick, or gone on a bender — and heck, just day-to-day shifts can occur — what was “undeteactable” then may not be now.  (Add to this that some guys rarely or never update their profile text, especially not portions which would change their chances of getting laid.)  And thus coded use or reading of the term has an added risk attached.

What is a “wink”, a “smile”, or a “tug”?

On most of the cruise sites, there exists a button or link to Send A Smile to another site member (whose profile you are viewing), Send a Tug, a Nudge, a Wink, Poke them, and so on.  But you’ll also see profiles where users say “Don’t send tugs” or “I don’t reply to winks.”

You have to wonder why, if some people hate these things so much, they are still even available.

What They Are

What these things are (mostly) intended to be are content-free “Hello” mechanism.

In the real world, motorcycle riders signal each other as they ride by, acquaintances wave to each other across the bar, and people make brief eye-contact at the supermarket.  We acknowledge each other’s presence and existence, and signal a mild recognition.

The intent of these online mechanisms is pretty much the same thing.  “You’re on my buddy list and I thought I’d say hi.”  “I looked at your profile and wanted you to know I thought it was good.”  “I see that you sent me a smile, so here’s one back.”

Why People Hate Them

The problem that arises is that many of these interactions which gay guys encounter (other than Facebook “pokes”) are on cruise sites, and thus may carry sexual intent.  You wouldn’t be there if you weren’t looking for (or at least thinking about) sex, right?  So when you “nudge” someone, what does it mean?  (Well, it means exactly what you meant it to mean, right?)

For the person receiving the “tug”, though, it could be interpreted to mean many things:

• I’m your buddy, just saying hi
• I visited your profile
• I visited your profile and liked it
• I want you to visit my profile
• I think you’re sexy/hot/cute/woofy
• I think you’re sexy/hot/cute/woofy but I’m too shy to send you a real note
• I think you’re sexy/hot/cute/woofy but saying nothing more than “I think you’re sexy/hot/cute/woofy” in a note sounds dumb (and nothing more than “Hey” would sound real dumb)
• I expect you to know exactly what I mean by this and for you to do the correct follow-up, and I’ll be pissy if you don’t

Ambiguity in socio-sexual settings unnerves many guys.  They don’t know how to interpret the signals, they don’t know if they should react, they don’t know what the next move is (if any).  And so rather than making some response which might be inferior or outright wrong, they throw up their hands and say “Go away!  If you can’t be 100% clear in your intentions [which is to say, if I can’t be 100% sure about your intentions], I’d rather not have them directed at me!”

What I Do

When I get a wink/nudge/smile/poke/tug, I treat it for the one thing it unambiguously is: an invitation to (think about) conversation.  (That’s the one thing definite: another person was saying “Hey, I’m here!”)

Then I analyze further.  Do I recognize the screen name?  (And if so, do I need to do anything more?)  I most likely go look at the guy’s profile: maybe I’ll recognize his pic, or maybe he has new pics or new profile details.  If he’s someone I have any interest in acknowledging back — I know him, or he’s sexy/hot/cute/woof, or I just feel that it would be polite — I’ll send at least a wink/nudge/smile/poke/tug in return (I’ll “wave back”).  And maybe I’ll linger on his profile, check out his pics, fantasize a bit, and then send a full message back to him, saying how sexy/hot/cute/woofy I think he is and how I’d like to wink/nudge/smile/poke/tug him in person sometime and is he free tonight or this weekend?

But I find it really hard to be annoyed at someone whom I may not know who is waving at me from across the room.

(Now, if everyone across the room started waving all at once with big sweeping arms and jumping up and down… I’d probably pop one of those Viagra pills smuggled out of Nigeria by the prime minister’s cousin and go fuck them all at once.)

What does “Poz-Friendly” mean?

Short Answer

“Poz-Friendly” means “HIV-negative, but willing to have sex with positive guys, using rubbers and such.”

Much Longer Answer

In the 1980s, AIDS and HIV had the gay community running scared.  Early on, no one knew what it was or how it was contracted.  For guys who didn’t have AIDS and who weren’t especially well informed, avoidance became a major method of dealing with it: avoid social contact and especially avoid sexual contact.

Later, when the sexual and body fluids transmission routes became better documented, the social avoidance issues eventually mostly went away.  Of course, habits born of emergency and fear are hard to kill, so it took years for the bulk of the gay community to re-establish suitable social engagement, and that cascades outward, such that you still get bizarre transmission avoidance notions in third-world countries, such as eating lots of garlic with ward of HIV.

But if social avoidance largely ceased, sexual avoidance didn’t.  How safe are condoms?  How safe is oral sex?  How safe is open-mouthed kissing?  These sorts of questions, coupled with the push to desensitize people to the idea of HIV by encouraging guys to reveal their HIV status prior to a sexual encounter, kept sex with HIV+ as a major avoidance subject.  That continues to this day.  You can see online profiles loaded with terms like “negative”, “clean”, and “DDF” (drug and disease free), all of which are code for “HIV+ need not apply.”

One of my regrets from the mid-1990s is that when I was dating Eric, and he informed me of his HIV+ status, I broke things off with him.  Not directly, consciously because he was positive, but over the following year or two, I realized that was the core of things, and that embarrassed me.  That brought me to a few realizations:

1. Drug advances at the time were making HIV less of a death sentence than it had been in the previous years.
2. I was living in the San Francisco Bay Area at the time, so I was cutting off a large pool of potential boyfriends and sex partners by cutting out HIV+ guys.
3. Until I was told, I couldn’t tell if someone was HIV+, and due to incubation periods and other issues, a guy might not know his own status, so any reaction I had might be only after we had had sex, at which point the risks had already occurred.

After achieving these realizations, I accepted that my own behaviors were the most important part of the equation.  If I insisted on appropriate measures, I could have hot sex and even pursue relationships with guys regardless of their HIV status, and even if they didn’t know their status accurately, I could avoid being a blocker to pleasure.

Obviously, I’m not the only person to have come to these realizations.  They are fairly widespread (although not universal) in the leather community, where there is a more strongly stated awareness of both what safer sex practices mean (due to the broader range of sex acts leather guys engage it) and an awareness of the costs when aspects of the community are sidelined and pushed away (since leather has been itself in the past).

Today, many guys who have come to these realizations and want to be sure that other people are aware of it — especially HIV+ guys, since they are those who are primarily targetted with the phrase — use “Poz-Friendly” (often as “Safe Sex/Poz-Friendly”) in their online profiles as such, indicating both that they engage in safe sex (rubbers and gloves) and that they don’t discriminate based on HIV status.

Mr. Friendly

An effort has been made to attach some iconography to this concept, called “Mr. Friendly”, a smiley face with his nose a + and one eye a -.  (Myself, I think the icon fails.  I identify the icon as the Jack In The Box mascot before attaching sex-related meanings to it.)  You can read more about Mr. Friendly here.

What does “discreet” mean?

I often see cruise posts — especially on CraigsList — where the writer describes himself as “discreet”.

Once upon a time, that would have referred to the person himself being discreet, being trustworthy when it comes to dealing with people who may have careers or other situations where it would be bad to have their name and pics broadcast widely in a homosexual context.  (For example, an elementary school teacher or someone living with an elderly parent.)  By extension, a request for a hookup connection to be “discreet” was a request to respect those sensitive areas: don’t broadcast my name, understand why the only pic I can send you includes a woman, please don’t leave sexy messages on my answering machine.

Today, of course, that meaning has mutated.  Today, “discreet” allegedly means closeted.  From Urban Dictionary:

A word gay/bi men use to describe themselves in a cool way that they are closet cases and have no intention of coming out soon.  This allows them to maintain perceived heterosexual privilege while engaging in their true sexual desires.

Beyond “closeted”, though, these days “discreet” today tends to mean “cheating”.  When a guy says he’s “discreet”, you can bet that he’s not in an open relationship and he’s not just in the closet: he’s sneaking around on his boyfriend/husband/girlfriend/wife without permission.

Which means:

• He may be giving you a fake name.  (I got hit up by someone going by the name “John Master”, a name one porn film short of “Rod Steel”.)
• He doesn’t have a facepic to give you.  If he’s gay, he might have a dickpic, though.
• He may well flake out on actually meeting for sex.  (Yeah, just like the out gay boys, you say, but it’s even more likely.)
• He will be offended if you suggest that he is cheating on someone.
• If you ever see him out socially, he probably won’t even acknowledge knowing you (especially if he gave you a fake name), much less be friendly to you.

In general, there are enough horny gay guys out there who are reasonably out that you don’t need to settle for the dodgy ones who won’t do the online equivalent of looking you in the eye.

---

Updated on June 8, 2010

This post was inpsired by a guy I was chatting with for a potential hookup who dropped the “pretty discreet guy here” bomb only on the third exchange.  I completely blew up at him:

• If it means you’re scared to death you might be seen in another neighborhood than you are usually in, stay home.
• If it means you’re scared to death that if I see you out and about, I might say “Hello”, stay home.
• If it means coming here would be cheating on a boyfriend/husband/girlfriend/wife — if you don’t have an open enough relationship to do this — stay home (and talk to that person about your interests).

On the other hand:

• I’m not going to come up to you on the street and say “Hello, want to fist me again” in front of your buddies.
• I’m not going to post your pics on my blog to say “I did this guy.”
• I’m not going to stalk you after the fact, or get “weird”.

But:

• I’m not going to protect your closet (whatever sort of “closet” it might be), but neither will I tear off the door and point at what you have in there.

What is an “Open Relationship”?

Seattle has been called the “Land of Open Relationships”, which is to say that in many couples here, the partners are non-monogamous (to some degree), free to create secondary amorous relationships of various lengths and intensities.

(Or to put it crassly, they are free to sleep around.)

I’m referring primarily to gay male relationships here, but it extends to sex-positive straight couples in the area as well.  (And maybe well beyond that.)

In part, this may be attributable to Seattle’s (and Washington’s) rankings in terms of percentage of the population that is gay and the like.  (See this page.)  Some of its is also attributable to the high profile of the Center for Sex-Positive Culture, which embraces a broad swath of forms of sexuality.  And to sex-positive columns like “Control Tower” (by Mistress Matisse) and “Savage Love” (by Dan Savage) which run in The Stranger (with the latter column also being syndicated nationally), both of which have abundantly discussed the concept of polyamory and GGG (Good, Giving, and Game).

You could say that the idea of the Open Relationship is in the water around here.  (And we’ve got a lot of water around here!)

What is an Open Relationship?

In its simplest form, an “Open Relationship” is recognition within a couple that some form of sex outside the bounds of their relationship is acceptable; in particular, it is not “cheating”, since cheating requires such sex to be unacceptable.  This can have a broad range of possibilities, such as:

• Just Don’t Tell Me: one partner turns a blind eye to the other’s extra-relationship activities, knowing that stuff occurs but not knowing the details of it (or not wanting to know).
• When the Cat’s Away: when one partner is out of town, that partner (or both) is allowed to play with others.
• Kink Exploration: a non-kink partner allows the kinky one to explore activities and grow in sexual areas that don’t work for the entire couple.
• Three-Ways: a couple invites a third person to join them in sex on occasion.
• Triads: a couple adds a third person to the relationship on an ongoing basis.
• Secondary Partners: one or both partners develop secondary ongoing sexual relationships, often with the explicit knowledge of the primary partner.  “This is my husband, and this is my boyfriend.”  (This one is sometimes very hard for people to wrap their heads around due to our society’s inability to separate sex from love.)
• And then there are couples who merrily go their own way and fuck in whatever way attracts them at the moment.  (“See you in the morning, sweetie!”)

How does an Open Relationship work?

Cribbing some from Wikipedia and adding my own thoughts, there are some things which need to be established in the relationship before an Open Relationship can be viable:

• Fidelity vs. Monogamy: realize that there is a difference between the two concepts and embrace the idea that something can be “just sex”.
• Trust: both members of the couple have to believe that the other is going to be true to the relationship and not damage or jeaopordize it (which includes that neither one is looking to break out of the relationship nor will do so if the opportunity arises).
• Communication and Negotiation: open relationships don’t just happen, they should be created consciously (well, “Just Don’t Tell Me” ones tend to be created sub-consciously).  Rules and boundaries need to be set, need to be explicit (ideally), and need to be adhered to.
• Non-possessiveness: jealousy about sex had with others cannot be allowed to intrude on the relationship.

Is all this really possible?  Hard to say.  Do you know anyone in an Open Relationship?  More to the point, do you know anyone who you know is in an Open Relationship?  (Do you actually know the relationship setup of the people you know?)  Odds are very strong that you do know people in one form of an Open Relationship or another, but relatively few broadcast the details.  (One study estimated 1/3 to 2/3 of gay couples are non-monogamous, although that includes both Open Relationships and “cheaters”.)

Of course, there’s also the question of whether Open Relationships actually work?  Many gay male relationships — and especially ones which don’t have the legal ties of marriage involved — break apart over time.  (This is a version of “Half of all marriages end in divorce,” which probably isn’t completely true.)  Sometimes Open Relationship issues are involved in the demise of a relationship, sometimes not.  (I have had two long-term relationship end which were Open to varying degrees.  One ending had nothing to do with the Open nature of things, while in the other, he found someone else and broke things off with me.)  Do Open Relationships work?  Probably no better or worse than any other relationship type, but they do manage to remove the big stumbling block of “I want to fuck that guy” causing relationship problems.  (What would qualify as “success” here, anyway?  Does it “work” only if the relationship stays Open and the couple stays together until someone dies?)

Rules for an Open Relationship

Years ago, I got these Rules For An Open Relationship (specifically for an Open Relationship where the couple plays individually with others) from a gay comic book artist I know:

• Safer Sex Every Time: rather than just a pronouncement about protected vs. unprotected sex, this really means “Don’t bring anything unexpected back into the primary relationship, and don’t spread anything that is already there to unexpecting third parties.”
• No Mutual Friends: this is a version of the straight world’s “Don’t sleep with your boyfriend’s best friend.”  No matter how hot he is.
• No One More Than Three Times: because that starts to be a relationship, not “just sex”.  Unless you are wanting to go fully into the realm of polyamory and have discussed it and agreed to it.

I continue to think that those are good relationship rules, but I would add one more (from my own experience):

• Don’t Bring It Home: if your relationship allows play while the partner is out of town, do it at the third party’s place, or a hotel, or a sex club.  “Don’t fuck in our bed while I’m not here.”

And a corollary for those who participate in group sex and anonymous sex:

• The “Friends” and “Three Times” Rules Don’t Always Apply: if your relationship includes three-ways or going to sex clubs or group sex “play parties”, especially regularly held ones, it can be hard to avoid (or even keep track of!) those rules, so it is probably best to suspend them for such an event.  But only consciously suspend them, of course, and only within boundaries.  In particular, play party sex buddies need to stay as sex buddies within and only within the play party context.

(It’s worth noting as well that all relationships are fluid, changing over time.  What is Open this year should not necessarily be Open next year, as the couple’s needs change.  An Open Relationship which stops being Open does not indicate problems, just evolution.)

Will these rules and guidelines and proper communication ensure that your Open Relationship is successful and lasts for year and years?  Who can say?  Mine did not, but then again, the rules got broken: a play party sex buddy became a friend, and then became a non-play party sex buddy, and then became a “more than three times” sex partner, and then became the new boyfriend, and all this with communication of the situation only coming at the end.  (Ain’t that the way it always goes?)  On the other side, though, because we had an explicit Open Relationship, emotionally charged issues about “cheating” never arose in the final communication, just more analytic/process issues about “broken rules”, which means that the friendships involved have largely managed to survive the demise of the relationship, and that has to be considered a good thing.

What is the “Hanky Code”?

So you’re out at the local gay bar and you see a hunky number you’d like to cruise.  Then he turns around to talk to someone or order a drink, and you get a view of his yummy ass.  But what’s that in his pocket?  A colored bandana?  Didn’t you hear that those mean something, that different colors mean different things?

Quick, get out your gay phone (iPhone) and Google it.  Choose this link.  Or this one.  Or this one.  Maybe check them all out.

What the --?  There are dozens of colors listed.  How are you supposed to remember all this stuff?  And man, if you read the various lists closely, they don’t even all agree!

First, Some History

The Hanky Code is a list of bandana colors and associated (gay) sex activities.

In the 1970s and before, the gay community (and especially the gay leather community) used many non-verbal signals to help indicate sexuality and sexual activity preferences.  At the time, engaging in homosexual activity at all could get you arrested; engaging in kink activities would just make that worse, so these non-verbal signals were invaluable.  Non-verbal signals includes styles of dress — Levis, leather jackets, etc. — and accessories such as keys attached to belt loops, rings attached to jacket epaulets, and bandanas stuck in back pockets.  All completely innocent items, unless you knew to look for them and how to decode them.

(This, of course, is the root of the concept of “gaydar”, detecting other gay men amongst the mass of presumed straight humanity.  All the little signals that we read — sometimes subconsciously — which add up to “He’s gay.”)

Even gay bars and bathhouses “signaled”, via their names.  Straights might not think anything of a given name, but names with sexual double entendres — Hole, Slot, Ambush, End-Up — were as good as a neon sign if you knew what you were looking for.

Top or Bottom

The first thing you need to know is which side means what.  That’s easy: left is top and right is bottom.  Anything on the left signifies top, and anything on the bottom signifies bottom.  Hanky, keys, wallet chain, arm band, knot on a bandana tied around the neck, etc.

Okay, it’s not quite that easy: when this sort of codification first came into being, the definitions were regional rather than global.  The West Coast (California, especially) used Left=Top, but either/both the East Coast and Europe (I’ve never had it confirmed which) used the reverse, Left=Bottom.  Needless to say, this could cause confusion for tourists and business travelers.  By the time the 1990s rolled around, though, California-style had largely won out, although people still knew that there was or had been a difference.

(In terms of heraldry — coats of arms and such — things on the left are dubbed “sinister” and things on the right are dubbed “dexter”.  “Sinister”=Top has always seemed like the right rule to me.)

And for those who are thinking ahead, yes, putting something in the middle can be read to mean “Versatile”.  (Which itself means “Bottom” to some guys, of course.  Off or On, Top or Bottom, Gay or Straight: they can’t conceive of anything outside of binary existence.  Bisexual is right out.)  Of course, you have to be careful with that location.  It’s a nicely symmetric place for handcuffs, but hanging your keys from the the belt loop in the back of your pants makes them hard to reach.

Color Matching

In the case of hankies (bandanas), there are a whole slew of colors out there, for whatever uses cowboys and construction workers and mechanics (whew, is it getting hot in here?) might use them for.  That and knowing that our ability to accessorize is what separates man from animals means that there has to be a use for each color.

It’s easy to reverse engineer the creation of much of the hanky code.  Navy blue is probably the most common bandana color, so it goes with the most common activity: fucking.  Since sucking dick is so tightly coupled with fucking, make it light blue (“fucking lite”).  Red obviously goes to fisting, yellow to piss play, and brown to scat play.  (Yes, Virginia, there are people into that.)  Black and gray are another heavy/light pairing, and get connected to S&M and bondage, respectively.

(As another possible derivation of Red=Fisting, red flags are supposed to be attached to loads hanging out the back of your truck.  I’m sure we can make some connection path to that.)

After the colors that you actually occasionally see in bandanas, and the big ticket leathersex activities that go with them, though, what about all the other bandana colors?  And what about all the other colors of the rainbow, whether they ever actually show up as bandana colors?  (Well, of course they do, or can, exist: go to the fabric store, get a yard of fabric, and break out the sewing machine, boy!)

Why Are There Multiple Lists?  Which One is Right?

It is doubtful that the different lists were both created independently.  Way too many secondary items match up the same on each list for true independence.  More likely, someone created an initial list, and then either (a) different people fleshed out items they saw as missing, or (b) someone tried to replicate the list from memory and got some things wrong, or [most likely, to me] (c) someone decided to “fix” the list, either to match his own preferences or to just make his own variant.

(Ask country line dancers about how line dances that date from pre-Internet days mutated as they propagated, due to either poor memory or “fixing” the dances, resulting in regional differences that are sometimes minor and sometimes vast.  It’s like a giant game of “grapevine”.)

(I was once told that the differences are likely due to geographic separation between East and West Coasts.  To be sure, there has historically tended to be a lot more north/south movement and interaction between leathermen than there has been east/west, at least until the expansion of cheap air fare in the 1990s made that more viable, so I can buy this as an explanation.  This also ties in with the geographic left/right dichotomy mentioned above.)

Decades down the line, of course, what was once intended as fun (or even as funny) now sometimes gets seen as a Holy Artifact of Old Guard Leather, as though Marlon Brando himself whispered it in the ear of Larry Townsend from behind a curtain and Mr. Marcus then transcribed it onto gold plates.  (Oh, I’ll burn for that one!)  And thus guys today encounter the Hanky Code and they think they are supposed to obey it, and to do that, they are required to memorize this super long list of color/fetish combinations.

This is bullshit.  No one expects you to memorize the entire list, nor do you need to.

(Of course, it is an understandable belief in its way.  PINs, passwords, pledges of allegiance, Boy Scout oaths, etc.: our society is heavy on memorization.  And for those of us who are founts of useless trivia, something like the Hanky Code is very doable.  If I can manage to remember the sci-fi codenames, real names, home planets, super powers, and origin stories of 50-odd members of the Legion of Super-Heroes and the order they joined over the course of 50 years of stories and 5 continuities, then pfft, 40 color/fetish combos is a breeze!  Any geek would agree.)

So what we get today is guys new(er) to leather encountering the Hanky Code and freaking out at the long list, convinced that they are being judged as a Real Leatherman on whether they can rattle off the meaning of a coral-colored teddy bear in a silver lamé jumper in the left pocket.  And thus they reject the entire concept out of hand.

(That would be a titleholder or pornstar who wants to cuddle and suck on your toes.  Just for the record, you understand.)

Is the Hanky Code of Any Use?

That depends on what you think the hanky code is or should be or could be used for.

Does it assure you of getting laid?  Fuck no.  (Or is that “No fuck”?)

Does it provide a means of non-verbal communication, an invitation to cruise, converse, and pick-up?  Fuck yes!

Don’t be distracted by the (fun) junk content of the long Hanky Code lists.  No one expects you to be able the tell the difference between Peach and Apricot (bears vs. chubbies) or Dark Yellow and Gold (heavy piss vs. three-ways) in bar light.  Hell, no one expects you to ever even see some of those colors for hankies in the real world.  (Although I know where you can buy most of them, if you’re really interested.)

(Let me stress here again: all the myriad colors and their fetish pairings are intended to be fun!  Peach is for bears because bears are fuzzy!  Mosquito netting is for outdoor sex because of the bugs!  Mustard is for “more than 8 inches” because mustard goes on foot-long hot dogs!  And so on!)

What you do need to remember are the Big 10 colors: Black, Grey, White, Red, Orange, Yellow, (dark) Green, (light) Blue, (dark) Blue, and Brown.  (That is: S&M, Bondage, JO, Fisting, Anything, Piss, Daddy/Boy, Sucking, Fucking, and Scat.)  Oh, and remember anything you like and want to flag, such as Piercing (purple) or Puppy Play (bone print).

(Orange is one of the major differences between the lists.  One list has it as Anything Top/Anything Bottom depending on the side, while the other has it as Anything/Nothing Now (Just Cruising).  I prefer the former, since it echoes everything else in the list better; it gives a pig play bottom something to flag without being needing a dozen bandana stuffed in the same pocket.  And of course, I’m simply confused about “Just Cruising”.  What the fuck is that?  Cruising is what we’re all doing when flagging.  If you don’t want anything, don’t flag anything!)

Does the Hanky Code Get Used?

The Big 10 are just about the only colors you will likely ever see being flagged, and thus the only ones you really need to be able to identify.  Yes, I have seen brown flagged: once at IML and once at MAL.  Not my scene.  I’ve also seen Purple flagged a couple times.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen most of the other lesser colors, or if I did, I didn’t recognize them for what they were.  In the local bar, the only colors I see with regularity are Red, Yellow, Dark Green, and Black (but that’s hard to notice in leather pants), and sometimes Gray.  Yellow seems to have become far less common in the past decade.

So back to the question: does anybody actually use the hanky code?  Well, I do.  If I’m going out to the bar — or generally any time on the weekends, anywhere around town — I have a hanky in my pocket.  (Usually a red one.)  Will it get me a “sudden date”?  Probably not, but on the off chance that someone will see it and approach me, it’s a whole lot better than not having it there!

If you go to any leather bar — and definitely if you go to a big leather event like IML or MAL or Folsom Street Fair — you will see people flagging, and you can be sure they are doing it quite intentionally.

If you are just out and about somewhere other than a gay neighborhood and you see someone with a colored hanky in his pocket, well, odds are against it, but he could be flagging (like I do).  Does he set off your gaydar?  Does he have the bearing of a leatherman?  As noted before, a hanky in the pocket isn’t an invitation to fuck so much as an invitation to talk about fucking.  So go talk (or at least make eye contact) if he turns your crank!  Worst case, he’s a clueless straight contractor.

So, Should You Flag a Hanky?

You know, that’s ultimately up to you.

I know several guys who are completely disdainful of flagging, apparently under the idea that some people — straight people! — flag unknowingly.  As best I can tell, rather than get their hopes up that some random person they see might be a fetish match for them but actually isn’t, they prefer to toss out the entire concept.  Cutting their losses, it seems.

Others can’t decide what they should flag.  Does yellow send too strong a message, will it ruin my reputation?  (Might make it, actually.)  Does light blue send too weak of a message?  (Depends on how much you like cocksucking.)  Can you get away with two hankies in the pocket?  (I say yes, but three is pushing it.)  Three in one and two on the other side.  (Mmm, no.)  Should I wear red in both pockets since I’m versatile?  (Hmm, I’ve never tried it.  Give it a shot.)  Do I just wear orange to cover all the bases?  (To swap around the line Tony DeBlase is famously credited with, only if you’re into kangaroo shit.)  Faced with too many choices, some guys freeze and opt for nothing rather than risk going too far or not far enough.

Myself, I know from direct experience that flagging sometimes does work.  (I was on my way to a fisting party in Berlin, to a bar I had never been to before.  Someone else on his way there noticed my hanky and helped me find the place.  We also played later.)

I’m also cognizant of the historical nature and value of flagging, and I consciously choose to propagate this behavior both to show my honoring of our past and to promote those older rituals which actually still work in today’s world.

---

Updated on April 6, 2010

You can even get a Hanky Code app for your iPhone!

I forgot to include links to various hanky code listings.  Fixed that.  It was remarkably hard to find one which featured orange in the top/bottom way that I think it should be.  And I found that Wikipedia’s entry has some oddities of its own, like attaching Rust to Pony Play rather than to Western Fetish like I think it should be.

There has been something of a renaissance of additions to the hanky code in recent years, such as:

• Lightning Bolt Print (Electrical Play)
• Bone Print (Puppy Play) — (with the color of the background signifying fist pup, piss pup, etc.)
• Mint Green (Leathergirl)

Updated on February 11, 2011

A recent Facebook exchange with my friend Lorelei brought up the discussion of what a plaid hankie she once saw might mean.  I suggested three options:

• Dyke Top / Dyke Bottom
• Scotsman / Looking for a Kilt
• Lumberjack / His Tree

(This last echoes off of the Rust hanky definition being “Cowboy / His Horse”, which is presumably Western Fetish/Cowboy Gear.  “Lumberjack / His Tree” would mean Outdoorsman Fetish — hiking, camping, etc.  Although now that it’s been proposed, someone will twist “Lumberjack” into shorthand for “Axe Play”.  Sigh.

Updated on September 8, 2011

Corrected a bunch of typos, added links, and revised/clarified some of the text, including adding the paragraph on gay bar names.

Three more colors which vary between lists:

• White: JO (masturbation) or Not Looking, depending on the list you look at.  As mentioned above with the variances with Orange, why would you flag anything to signal you aren’t looking?
• Rust: Cowboy/His Horse (which I read as Cowboy Fetish) on older lists, Animal Play on others.  Presumably meaning Furries/Animal Role Play rather than Zoophilia.  This may be a repurposing of an underused color to be something more common today, or it may be a total misconstruing of what “His Horse” would have meant in the 1970s.
• Lime: Pays for Dinner/Dines off Tricks on older lists, Foodplay on newer ones.  Again, likely an example of repurposing an underused color to be something more common today.

And a mystery one from a recent Facebook thread: what should Steel Blue be used for?  One person suggested sailors.  I suggested some narrow slice of police (state troopers?), since it is close to Medium Blue.

What is a “Bear”?

Along the same lines as my “What is a ‘Twink’?” post from 15 months ago, the question of “What is a ‘Bear’?” came up via the comic Blur the Lines on January 19.

A bear is (select at least two):

• Large Bodied (could be either Heavyset or Muscled)
• Hairy
• Bearded

And thus:

• Big hairy guy, clean shaven?  Bear
• Beard and fur, but slim?  Bear
• Bodybuilder with a beard?  Bear
• Fat guy without either much hair or beard?  Not Bear

Cub (young bear), Otter (thin bear), Wolf (medium bear, or loner bear, or agressive), Pocket Bear (short bear), Kuma (Asian bear) — all variations on a theme.  If you want to slice and dice the labelling, go for it.

As for “Behr”: when the Bear Code was put together 20+ years ago, this meant “Bear with a moustache but not a beard”. Another sometimes useful variation on the theme.

---

You can see that the Natural Bears Classification System does indeed have an “h” for “the BEHR factor”, for moustaches.

Unaddressed in that is the question of what we call someone who sure looks like a Bear, but who is adamant about not being one.  (I vote for “Traitor”.)

My Bear Code: B3h f t dc k+ s+ e+ q  (“B3h” indicates a B3 beard with a standout moustache.)

What is a “Twink”?

This question recently came up on a list I’m on, and one person was tickled enough by it that he suggested I “publish” it.  By your command, edited for blogability…

It’s shorthand for “Twinkie&rdquo — which we all know is golden sponge cake with cream filling, light and fluffy and full of preservatives and pretty much nutrition free, but (to some people) oh so yummy.

Ergo, a “twink&rdquo as a person is light and fluffy and full of cream (and often blond, and usually gay), without a lot of substance to him, but (to some people) oh so yummy.  A male airhead, like, you know?  (And I’m sure that somewhere, female twinks are referenced, too.  Probably letter-shifted to “twynks”.)

It used to be almost always a derogatory term, but these days, I gather it’s a mark of pride for some boys.  (It’s still a negative term in my book, though.  I never use it as a favorable reference.)

---

Updated on May 3, 2010:

I recently read more details on the origin of the term — when it was first used, whether it’s connected to the Hostess treat, etc. — but the details were inconclusive.  One of the more intriguing connections was to a British perm lotion called Twink, which inspired Britsh psychedelic musician John Charles Adler to adopt “Twink” as his stage name.  Adler was involved in bands called The Faries and the Pink Faries; draw your own conclusions.

Another possible origin for the word might relate to stars, as in “Twinkle, twinkle, little star.”  A twinkling star appears insubstantial and not stable.

---

Updated on February 11, 2011

Retroactively added another version of the definition to the blog, merging in from my older blog.  Complete with a nasty exchange from someone who misinterpreted humor for hatred.

What is “Kinky”?

I’m not about to try to define the word.

It seems to fall into the same class as obscenity: “I don't know what it is, but I know it when I see it.”  Pinning it down (ooh, there’s something kinky… maybe) is impossible, because
the specifics differ from person to person.

What I will say, though, is this:

If you do it, it’s kinky.
If they do it, it’s perverted.

(And if you don’t do it but you’re still oddly intrigued, then it’s edge play.  Because you’ll probably try it someday.)

---

Updated on March 16, 2011

What is a “Twinkie”?

For more than a decade, the term “Twinkie” has been in use in the gay community, especially in the leather and bear sectors, to describe a certain type of guy.  While it is usually used derisively, in good queer form it has been embraced by those it was used to describe and turned into it’s own self-affirming and descriptive term.

It amazes me, though, the number of people who apparently have no idea what the term means.  They have this hazy idea that it means “young guys” or “club kids,” but they miss the what-should-be-obvious derivation.  (Maybe this is an indicator of the post-modern nature of our society today, that we refuse to look for the obvious or surface connection, instead expecting irony or conspiracy in everything.)

Here, then, is a definition (as posted to the Handball list at QueerNet):

A "Twinkie" is made of light, golden sponge cake, stuffed with cream filling, loaded with preservatives, and not very good for you.  (With apologies to Hostess.)

Ergo, human Twinkies are likewise fluffy, full of cream, and not very good for you.  They are often quite young, but if Twinkies have an alleged 17-year shelf life, so may human ones…

(Hostess also used to make both chocolate and chocolate-covered Twinkies, just in case you think the human variety is only blond.)

---

Comment by Fritz (from New York) on June 28, 2004

You may think you are being witty, Jim, but by posting that drivel publicly, you not only offended our young friend in San Diego, but potentially everyone on the list who is under 30 or maybe interested in guys under 30.  Please note that this is not a public post, it is private to you.  What I find astonishing is that a self-styled “daddy” who is 36, turning 37 soon, would put out a public post so contemptuous of younger guys.  If you are not interested in meeting, connecting with and perhaps helping younger guys, because, according to your post, they are all “fluffy, full of cream, and not very good for you”, what in hell gives you the right to call yourself a “Daddy”?  I’ve earned that right, boy, both by benefit of age and by being willing to meet and judge any man on his personal attraction for me and to me, his willingness to learn, and his intrinsic merits, not arbitrary standards of age, race, class, income, etc.  There is a word for such arbitrary judgements, and the word is bigotry.  By my calculations, legal age plus your shelf-life of a “Twinkie” is 18 +17 = 35.  Since you recently passed that barrier, do I detect a faint whiff of bitterness from an ex-twinkie who now wants to pretend to be a daddy?  Get a life, and learn a little humility when talking to a forum of men who have far more experience and compassion than you are willing to demonstrate.  If you consider this a flame, so be it.  One of the benefits of my advanced age — I’m approaching 60, and proud of it, and I’d hate to see your opinions of older men — is a flame-proof asbestos suit against wannabes on the Internet who think they are being clever.

Two words, Jim. Grow up!

And my response back to him, which I sent back publicly (intentionally so, despite his original comment being not to the list) to the list the original definition was posted to, also on June 28, 2004

I’m sorry you were unable to see the humor intended and (I think) inherent in what I posted.  Several other people e-mailed me to say they enjoyed it (but that’s just anecdotal evidence, I realize).  But you know…

The surest way to get me to air something publicly is to all but dare me to post it, to let the world see you attempt to smack someone down.  Want to try to avoid having them smack you back?  If you’ve got something foul to say about a public post I made, dear, you can say it publicly.  Or I’ll say it for you, in your own words, by letting everyone know exactly what you’ve said.  Especially if you are someone who repeatedly shares his “wisdom” and “goodwill” with the list, establishing a gentle and fatherly tone.

Any respect I had for you is gone, Fritz.  But I’m sure you expected that, and that the feeling is mutual.

---

Updated on February 11, 2011

In other words, Fritz somehow assumed that (a) I hated the fact that I was in my mid-30s and growing older and (b) that I believed that “Twinkie” applied to all gay men in their 20s.  Neither of which was true, of course.

But to reiterate for clarity:

If a guy is fluffy, full of cream, and not very good for you, he's a “Twinkie”.  Such gay guys are often (but not always) young.

Apropos of nothing, Fritz died in 2010.

This was the first blog post I’ve done addressing this.  See also this one for a later one, with some research into the origins of the term.