Changes in the gay community

[stormydude]

No, it’s really not. We could have one half of a century left to live. How many gay people are being affected by this and will be in the next 50 years?

yes, it is.

 

[stormydude]

One thing I do have to say is that it would be nice if drag shows hadn't taken over pretty much every brick and mortar venue. I get that drag's popularity has skyrocketed, but if I'm out in the village (I made peace with my 19 year old class-rage) it would be nice to be able to sit and have dinner and a beer with some conversation without being heckled by a performer who takes over the room.

I guess they have to bandwagon with what is en vogue to keep people coming in the door, but it was cool when you could go to place to place because they all had a different vibe.

I am willing to bet there are great gay places all over the world that don't go straight (no pun intended) to the drag theme. Oddly enough, Oklahoma City was a great place that had multiple bars with diff themes/vibes/etc.

 

[Sphinx0101]

may be different in the states but i only hear much younger people or public figures saying they're 'queer' here in the uK - and i do go back more than 30 years - here 30 years ago, being called queer was definitely offensive!

yes. it obviously did not immediately change definitions. it is still used offensively today! but you seem to agree that the TREND is for it to be used less as an insult and more as a self identifier

there is a different style of political battle for trans rights in UK vs US that is too complex to get into here, but I believe it likely does lead more younger "traditionally gay" guys, who are into activism, to just use the queer label in solidarity. my point is this is not "gay erasure"

 

[deleted1074483]

but you seem to agree that the TREND is for it to be used less as an insult and more as a self identifier

not sure a few public types using it - which honestly feels more about making a statement than representing something - and a number of younger people makes a trend - i know far more people who dislike the term, both amongst old and young, gay, straight, lesbian, trans etc because it doesn't reflect who they are.

The point about erasing not just gay but lesbian, bi, etc is that by putting everyone in one big melting pot it ends up not being a very useful descriptor for anyone? Its a bit of a nothing word seemingly applicable to those who just don't conform to normal societal expectations through every other letter of the alphabet.

We're not an homogenous group and don't all need the same protections to be.

The danger is that we lose the rights that a lot of us oldies have fought very hard for, to change the law, and in law, because it becomes harder and harder to define what rights we're asking for beyond being treated as a human being.

 

[trav.]

The term queer was co-opted (by mostly gay men) over 30 years ago.

“Queer” has been an anti-gay slur since at least the late 19th century.

Today, it is rarely used as an insult. The list of synonyms you posted are outdated and not relevant.

How do you know that “queer” is rarely used as an insult? Also, its definition is not outdated or irrelevant. That’s what it actually means.

Pride was first created by a diverse group of activists who identified as gay, lesbian, trans, queer, radical faeries queens, divas, and countless other terms.

It was called Gay Pride, not Pride.

I see you have a negative personal experience with that term.

No, I had a violent and dehumanizing personal experience with that term for years.

Many others have had similar experiences but instead were just called gay.

Gay was not used as a slur in the same way as “queer”. That’s incomparable.

If the term is still this triggering, I would suggest therapy.

It’s not triggering. Find someone else on the internet to patronize.

 

[Sphinx0101]

not sure a few public types using it - which honestly feels more about making a statement than representing something - and a number of younger people makes a trend - i know far more people who dislike the term, both amongst old and young, gay, straight, lesbian, trans etc because it doesn't reflect who they are.

The point about erasing not just gay but lesbian, bi, etc is that by putting everyone in one big melting pot it ends up not being a very useful descriptor for anyone? Its a bit of a nothing word seemingly applicable to those who just don't conform to normal societal expectations through every other letter of the alphabet.

We're not an homogenous group and don't all need the same protections to be.

The danger is that we lose the rights that a lot of us oldies have fought very hard for, to change the law, and in law, because it becomes harder and harder to define what rights we're asking for beyond being treated as a human being.

no clue how some people identifying as queer is threatening your rights.

there has always been one big melting pot. the only thing i see actually being erased are the trans and queer activists who were instrumental in launching the gay rights movement.

no one is forcing you to identify as queer lol. nor are they calling it Queer Pride. Just Pride. chillllllll

 

[deleted1074483]

no clue how some people identifying as queer is threatening your rights.

there has always been one big melting pot. the only thing i see actually being erased are the trans and queer activists who were instrumental in launching the gay rights movement.

no one is forcing you to identify as queer lol. nor are they calling it Queer Pride. Just Pride. chillllllll

I'm very chill thanks ;-)

 

[Sphinx0101]

“Queer” has been an anti-gay slur since at least the late 19th century.

That pic was definitely not from one of the early events. What you call Pride was called Gay Liberation for like a decade. The term gay was used as an umbrella term then...

Please read Wikipedia on stonewall riots or something

 

[trav.]

That pic was definitely not from one of the early events.

It was taken from one of the first Gay Pride parades in Central Park, New York City on June 28, 1970.

What you call Pride was called Gay Liberation for like a decade. The term gay was used as an umbrella term then...

Please read Wikipedia on stonewall riots or something

Gay Pride (you called it “Pride”) existed long before Wikipedia, thank you very much. Furthermore, I’ve read books and watched documentaries about Stonewall. Also, “gay” by definition isn’t an “umbrella term”.

Please don’t believe everything you read on the internet, especially Wikipedia. Just yesterday, it had that actor Tony Dow had died which turned out not to be true.

 

[Sphinx0101]

It was taken from one of the first Gay Pride parades in Central Park, New York City on June 28, 1970.

Gay Pride (you called it “Pride”) existed long before Wikipedia, thank you very much. Furthermore, I’ve read books and watched documentaries about Stonewall. Also, “gay” by definition isn’t an “umbrella term”.

Please don’t believe everything you read on the internet, especially Wikipedia. Just yesterday, it had that actor Tony Dow had died which turned out not to be true.

dunno if this is supposed to be trolling or what good god

 

[dreambridger]

this has turned into a thought-provoking thread that I've enjoyed following!

I think the central concern being expressed is about those of us who fall outside the circle of "queer solidarity" and its associated activism which bears an implied sense of obligation, will we still have any representation in the gay world outside of all that noise? It seems a valid concern to me and nothing to be spoken down to, even if not everyone relates to that predicament which is fine. For those of us who don't identify with the flock, will we be written out of social existence by the present changes? It's a good question and one very much worth asking.

 

[trav.]

dunno if this is supposed to be trolling or what good god

First you come here to call this thread “bizarre”, suggest I might need therapy because I dislike an anti-gay slur, then imply that I am “trolling”. I think you’re a troublemaker. Let me know when you can have a mature adult discussion.

 

[trav.]

there has always been one big melting pot. the only thing i see actually being erased are the trans and queer activists who were instrumental in launching the gay rights movement.

Somehow I missed this response and this is one of the worst myths I’ve ever heard. Most of the people responsible for the gay rights movement were homosexual men and their contributions date back to nineteenth century Europe.

no one is forcing you to identify as queer lol. nor are they calling it Queer Pride. Just Pride. chillllllll

 

[BuckyD]

I don't like the recent politicization of homosexuality, I find it very alienating and disingenuously agenda'd. It also doesn't seem to work in favor of equality for all homosexuals/bisexuals to be placed on one side of the culture war, since diversity of outlook among gays and bi's seems crucial for the recognition of our respective individualities, and in turn coming off as normal and belonging among the masses. I think the political tribalism works very much against equality.

I do like the increased racial diversity, however, if it was less diverse in the past. I grew up in a city where mixed colors feel more like home to me, so I do prefer a more multicultural and multicolored gay scene.

Very much agree with this. The overt agendized politicization of gayness where gay people can now be openly victimized and targeted by other gay people if they don't show sufficient enthusiasm for the latest woke party line is a major negative for me, but the much greater racial and ethnic diversity in the gay community now is a huge positive. I find myself increasingly attracted to many men from visible minorities in the last few years because they seem to have a much more tolerant and sex positive attitude, more like what white upper middle class gay men USED to have but seem to have lost in recent years.

 

[LPSG Simon]

For those of us who don't identify with the flock, will we be written out of social existence by the present changes? It's a good question and one very much worth asking.

This reminds me a bit of talking to my parents and they worry that if someone else gets the same rights as them that somehow their rights will be taken away.

People get worried a lot about being knocked out of the dominant part of the narrative, as if when other people get a leg up that it somehow makes their position less important, but I don't think it's a starvation economy.

Gay men will always exist, and just because other people are more visible does not mean this will change. Keep calling yourself gay, and other people will call themselves what they want to as well. Pluralism can be a wonderful thing.

 

[dreambridger]

This reminds me a bit of talking to my parents and they worry that if someone else gets the same rights as them that somehow their rights will be taken away.

People get worried a lot about being knocked out of the dominant part of the narrative, as if when other people get a leg up that it somehow makes their position less important, but I don't think it's a starvation economy.

Gay men will always exist, and just because other people are more visible does not mean this will change. Keep calling yourself gay, and other people will call themselves what they want to as well. Pluralism can be a wonderful thing.

hmm...my concern isn't exactly about gay men in particular, though I know others in the thread are expressing that concern, I'm tweaking the point a little. My concern is more about gays and bi's and trans alike who don't stick to the script of the current trend of queer politics, that their voices will be buried under the noise and seen as no longer "counting" for not mimicking the popular LGBT+ hive mind. Like if you're a gay individual who gets written out of the scene and refused support by your supposed own because diversity of thought doesn't seem like its encouraged in that hive mind.

 

[nhguy78]

It’s unfortunate but there was a lot of shame and a negative stigma surrounding HIV then. The medications we have now didn’t exist and for a while people died in droves. That’s why they called it the plague. Families either lied and said someone died of cancer or some other unfortunate illness or they had no service at all. Some families cut off their gay family members and refused to claim the body when they died. So many people just gone so fast. We went to funerals and celebrated the lives of the ones who didn’t have them. It still makes me angry to think about it.

My parents refused to go to my wedding. Not gonna cry. They have changed since and unsure if they would go to a vow renewal ceremony 15 years later.

 

[LPSG Simon]

hmm...my concern isn't exactly about gay men in particular, though I know others in the thread are expressing that concern, I'm tweaking the point a little. My concern is more about gays and bi's and trans alike who don't stick to the script of the current trend of queer politics, that their voices will be buried under the noise and seen as no longer "counting" for not mimicking the popular LGBT+ hive mind. Like if you're a gay individual who gets written out of the scene and refused support by your supposed own because diversity of thought doesn't seem like its encouraged in that hive mind.

You do see the irony here, right?

Both in terms of those who didn't fit in when the the white young bougie male image reigned supreme, as well as when none of us did in the global scheme of things.

Funny what I notice with the boomers (see comment about talking to parents) is that when these things pop up they have some very stubborn blinders on when it comes to anything but me-first.

Visibility (and more importantly - equality) shouldn't be selective IMO. Especially to those who face a common source of oppression.

 

[Infernal]

My parents refused to go to my wedding. Not gonna cry. They have changed since and unsure if they would go to a vow renewal ceremony 15 years later.

I only have my father left and he was never engaged or cared about me once he and my mother divorced. He put on a good show of caring when I was around, but it only lasted as long as others were there to see it. I never bothered to tell him I was getting married. My uncle did after the fact and he got all weirded out by it. My mother would have loved my husband, and his mother loves me so I think I'm good without him. It's been almost 20 years since I've spoken to him. I don't miss it a bit.

 

[dreambridger]

You do see the irony here, right?

Both in terms of those who didn't fit in when the the white young bougie male image reigned supreme, as well as when none of us did in the global scheme of things.

Funny what I notice with the boomers (see comment about talking to parents) is that when these things pop up they have some very stubborn blinders on when it comes to anything but me-first.

Visibility (and more importantly - equality) shouldn't be selective IMO. Especially to those who face a common source of oppression.

I don't see any irony in my comment. I have no issues with visibility for all alternatives. I do get your point about boomers thinking rights for others means less rights for them, but I don't see how that all relates to what I'm saying. It's not about being recognized as a me-first. It's about me being recognized *at all*. Now I'll admit my whole life I've struggled with being embraced by the mainstream gay community -- whether its with me not being gay enough, or who I choose to hang out with, or my political or philosophical opinions about things -- and I'm trying very hard not to come from a bitter place about that. But maybe it harkens back to what we've all said about queer superficiality -- you have to look like them/act like them/think like them in order to be considered one of them. That contradicts the idea that the community should be one built on mutual support. My concern is that there seems to be a paradox where in an attempt to broaden the "queer" identity into this umbrella for us all to gather under, it actually narrows the scope of how far our respective individualities, in all their plurality, can reach and still be considered "among the tribe". My opinion might be different if I had found more personal support under that umbrella. I have found more kinship with fringe queer communities, like the queer section of the Burning Man tribe for example showed me a lot of support, or hell even the furry fandom is super welcoming to differently-minded gays like me, but as far the mainstream, and all the media representation of that mainstream, I've never been welcomed, and the scope of what's welcomed by that mainstream does seem to be getting narrower with time from my point of view.