As the title suggests, what is a "gay man" in today's social climate?

https://www.advocate.com/film/2020/10/0 ... k-mountain

"A livestreamed reading of Brokeback Mountain featuring an all-star transgender cast has been added NewFest’s New York LGBTQ Film Festival, which is going virtual this year."

The linked article prompted a discussion on another board I'm a member of where guess what happened? Those of us suggesting a "gay man" is a man with a dick sexually interested in other men with dicks were, per usual, called "transphobic," "hate-filled," "bigoted," and (my favorite) "misogynists"--all the usual nonsense that some loudmouth people go to when their feelings are hurt.

Nobody on "my" side of this discussion-turned-argument-turned-locked thread suggested trans-men shouldn't have equal rights or do with consenting adults whatever the hell they want--live your life as you see fit, see if I care. We were simply stating that trans-men who identify as "gay" but lack male parts don't get to tell us who we're required to have sex with in the name of equality, because it isn't their business. We're "gay men" because we're men who have dicks and are sexually interested in other men who have dicks.

As a gay man I find this bizarre narrative deeply frustrating (as do several of my gay/lesbian friends--both in "real life" and on-line). I have *never* in my life been sexually interested in a woman--is that against the rules? A vagina and breasts simply do nothing for me and as far as I can remember that's been the case. When I was younger I always assumed one day I'd want to physically be with girls and that my interest in the male form was nothing more than curiosity. Obviously I realized at a certain point "oh, y'know what? I have ZERO desire in the world put my dick in a vagina, touch a vagina, or have anything to do with a vagina whatsoever--cocks, please!" Born this way, and all that.

How come now it's all the rage to rail against me (and other gay men like me) for being all those nasty things I quoted above because we aren't sexually interested in trans-men who still have vaginas? How is it someone else's place to tell *me* what I should find sexually arousing? If a person is a biological female but identifies as male and is sexually interested in men how, exactly, does that make them a "gay man" who feels just in telling me I'm "part of the problem" because their female organs hold no sexual interest for me/other gay men?

This topic keeps coming up for me, by the way, because as a gay man I'm a member of several outlets previously thought to be communities for fellow gay men where now apparently anyone who calls themselves a gay man feels the right to come in and tell us how this works because...their feelings?

So, again, what is a "gay man" in 2020?

I think I've said my peace on the subject already, but I am in support of there continuing to be a word for people with penises who are only attracted to other people with penises

I have no idea plus Singapore does not allow/support homosexuality so its hard to see/understand those things for me. Also even though India and a few other Asian countries supports it, its still considered a "sin" in most of these countries as people aren't yet ready to be forward thinking.

Simply a man, or frankly whatever they identify as. Anyone that finds it necessary to define it hasn’t hit 2020 yet, hell they haven’t even hit 2000 yet.

I have enough trouble living the best life I can. Don’t need to worry about anyone else. Just be courteous and considerate to others, that’s enough for me.

How can someone with a vagina be a "gay man" without re-defining what "gay" is? This is where the "whatever they identify as" comes in conflict with reality a little bit. Are words and their definition entirely irrelevant now? That kind of makes communication with others difficult, if everyone gets to individually decide what each word means to them personally.

And what does "anyone that finds it necessary to define it hasn’t hit 2020 yet, hell they haven’t even hit 2000 yet" even mean? As Jack Sparrow mentioned, in so many places around the world citizens aren't even allowed to be openly gay without facing extreme repercussions up to and including death, so how is it something we're beyond worrying about as humans? Even in America up until *very recently* it was entirely legal to be fired from your job simply for being gay.

Also, the extremely discourteous & inconsiderate responses I quoted above were the whole point of this topic in the first place ;) I didn't call anyone names or point fingers that someone is less than, just suggest that differences do actually exist whether someone feels that way or not and it's nobody's place to tell other people who they're required to be sexually interested in.

Would you say it's reasonable to call a gay man who's personally not interested in having sex with someone with a vagina a transphobic, bigoted, hate-filled misogynist?

No, it's called preference if u like it then go ahead, if u don't, it doesn0t make u transphobic at allll

I'm glad we agree on that, as it seems simple enough ;)

Now, if the LGBTQ population as a whole could come to terms with these rather reasonable statements I'd appreciate it! All that vitriol from fellow gays or trans-people which prompted this topic in the first place certainly suggests we aren't quite there yet.

No that is not reasonable at all. I call it personal taste. It’s really making an issue over something as trivial as a straight man proclaiming “I only date blondes or girls with big asses”. Will I roll my eyes to myself, sure but I’ll still like you as a person.

We’ve learned consolidation of alternative sexualities doesn’t work (Masses are still mystified by bisexuality) so why would sub categorizing be any different? Skip the bullshit and let them do what they want. When it comes to bathrooms and the civil injustices of other countries, I can’t really speak to that. Make public bathrooms a first come basis and move on. That’s why handicap and family bathrooms exist. We’re not all sitting together shitting in a hole holding hands. I really don’t care who is in the stall next to me as long as they don’t talk to me.

Yes but a woman who's a sexual assault survivor may care if someone with a penis is using it with them.

The bathroom question also extends to changerooms and women's prisons. Should trans women be allowed in changerooms where 14 year old girls are undressing? There have been rape cases in women's prisons due to violent trans woman being sent there instead of men's prison.

Shack’s a TERF! Cancelled!

Personal taste isn't a problem and I didn't mention nor does my initial point have anything to do with bathrooms, so I'm not entirely sure you're following the issue I was running into.

It wasn't gay men being exclusionary of other gay men based on hair, ass size, dick girth, or anything like that--it was gay men being told that we're "part of the problem" for not considering people with vaginas to be "gay men" in the first place so therefore we aren't at all interested in them sexually. "Gay man" isn't a blanket term for anyone to identify with based on their feelings, it's a minority group consisting of men who are sexually interested in men (just as "black woman" isn't a catch-all term for anyone who identifies that way--you kind of have to be black and a woman, no?).

I don't dispute that trans-men who identify as gay exist, but why don't they just live in reality and identify as "gay trans-men" instead of insist that they & their vagina are 100% "gay man" and excoriate those not interested in dating them? What's wrong with calling a spade a spade?

There are countless sub-categories that gay men identify with (bears, twinks, otters, optimistic red velvet walrus, etc), but having a dick has always been a given--or at least, you'd think if the person describes themselves as a "gay man" that having a dick is kind of obvious. To run with your “I only date blondes or girls with big asses” analogy, this would be more the scenario I find ridiculous--forgive the brevity & bluntness, but I'm not going to write a whole short film about it right now ;) Anyway...

Person A & Person B meet at some random bar.

PERSON A (to Person B): Hi, I'm a straight man and I find your blonde hair and large ass attractive.

PERSON B: Great, I'm a straight woman and I find your blonde hair and big ass attractive!

PERSON A: How about we go on a date?

PERSON B: Sure, sounds good--I can't wait to see your dick!

PERSON A: Actually, I have a vagina. Does Saturday night work for you?

PERSON B: Oh, well then no thank you. I'm not interested in you sexually. So, what'd you think of Tenet?

PERSON A: YOU'RE A HATE-FILLED, BIGOTED, MISOGYNIST, TRANSPHOBE! GET OUT OF HERE!!

Does that make sense or seem like a rational response to you? I've been encountering that kind of immediately nasty shun-the-impure mentality more and more lately in the *gay men's* groups I've been a part of for years and it's bewildering.

that response is an overreaction, Just because you don't want to sleep with a trans person it doesn't make you transphobic.

The problem with the trans community is they're like

80% decent people who meant well
19% frauds (ie. they don't feel born in the wrong body but become trans for other reasons - ie. Guys trying to sleep with lesbians, people who struck out their whole life sexually making the ultimate hail mary, fake trans sports athletes, people who get turned on by dressing like the other gender, pedos, and overall, just narcissists who think it will make people notice them)
1% psychotic activists online who represent the entire group

So really the 80% who aren't a threat to anyone are let down by the other 20%. You can't let them into women's changerooms without also letting in lesbian porn addict, lonely incels and pedos who jumped on the bandwagon and decided to go from being a straight male to a trans lesbian, or a straight female to a trans gay. And the psycho TRAs make it impossible to have a real discussion about what is obviously a hard subject, in part because a lot of them are in the fraud group themselves. It would be nice to give the people with genuine gender dysphoria everything they want and treat them like the opposite sex, but there's no way to tell the difference at this point. You can't just tell the person who's not passing at all that they're not trans enough, because some of those people have real gender dysphoria and are just at the start of their process.

Have to say that I think it is hilarious that being gay is no longer woke enough.

I think it just boils down to the very loud 1% of crazies that misrepresent everything. Every group has that 1%, unfortunately, that the general public thinks represents the group itself. Just tell them to shut up and sit down because that 1% are truly beyond reason.

And in regard to this particular discussion, anyone getting upset about a gay man not being sexually attracted to a trans-man really needs to direct their "frustration" and efforts elsewhere, such as the concerning dissent today from Thomas and Alito falling just short of saying it's their desire to overturn Obergefell (gay marriage/marriage equality) because of its "ruinous consequences." There is a real threat to it, and many other real issues unlike finding another person fuckable, with the Supreme Court likely to become a solid 6-3 conservative majority soon.

TRAs are cancer, that's it.

No different from a cult, except instead of MAGA's "Democrats are evil pedophiles", it's "fuck me or you're a transphobe" which is akin to incels behaviour towards women.

I feel sorry for the trans people trying to live their lives. This cancerous behaviour will cause backlash in the long run since it's foundations are pathetic - made up of attention whores and liberals chasing the 'woke' train without even understanding it.