LGB ErasureLA Gays discuss the label "Queer" and keeping their minds open to heterosexual attraction. Is anyone else creeped out by the emphasis on needing to remind ourselves that our sexual orientation is "malleable?"

submitted by yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" from youtu.be

all 23 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Shadow_Lurker 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My cynical take on this is that it's more of a open letter to the gay/lesbian/bissexual larpers that have appeared in the recent years than a statement destined to actual gays and lesbians.They don't really believe in any of this, because if it was the case, they would not defend policy that depends on the notion of sexuality as fixed to make sense, like in the case of refugee grants.

It makes no sense to consider sexual orientation as a criteria for accepting refugees if their sexual orientation can just change on a whim, as it would leave the door opened to scammers to abuse the system (something which already happens, but would be only get worse).

[–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Back to the good old days of conversion therapy. JFC

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries"[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This weirded me out. I don't know whether to chalk this up to gay people in LA being really out of touch with the experiences of LGB people in other parts of the U.S. and around the world. But the emphasis by Carson McCalley on using the word "queer" for himself to remind himself to "keep the door open" to attraction to other types of people (read people of the opposite sex) weirded me out. Then he said, of course you can use the word "gay" for yourself and use that to remind yourself that your sexual orientation is "malleable."

What I also don't understand is then based on that logic who isn't "queer" and how does "queer" convey any meaning? Shouldn't people who have only ever been attracted to the opposite sex also call themselves "queer" to remind themselves to be open to homosexual attraction? How is any of this helpful to anyone? While of course we should not rush into prematurely applying labels to ourselves (and here we are not exactly the type of people to do that) and we shouldn't reject actual attraction just because it conflicts with a label we hastily applied to ourselves that doesn't quite fit, isn't it more helpful to yourself and to others you meet if you're a man who has only ever been attracted to men to use a word for yourself to convey specifically that? I just hate this postmodern, non-communicative, open-minded mush.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't know whether to chalk this up to gay people in LA being really out of touch with the experiences of LGB people in other parts of the U.S.

You think so? It's almost certain that's the case.

They are overprivileged kids that live in ultra-liberal megacities, where the prospect of conversion therapy or gay bashings are long gone. They don't fucking care.

Then he said, of course you can use the word "gay" for yourself and use that to remind yourself that your sexual orientation is "malleable."

Why are they imposing this shit to other people? Like, if they think so it's totally fine, just don't extrapolate it to others.

It isn't hard.

I just hate this postmodern, non-communicative, open-minded mush.

This shit don't only destroy language, but the actual capability of gay and lesbian people to describe themselves and organize with each other. If you can't define what 'gay' is thn how are you going to fight for gay rights?

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries"[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You think so? It's almost certain that's the case.

It's just that most of them are transplants and were born and raised elsewhere and presumably made the choice to move to LA where they could be more openly gay. And now they have the social power to impose this privileged blasé worldview on all of us. I live in a liberal area too, so it's not like I fear bodily harm for being a lesbian here, but it's also not easy showing affection in public here because you may get treated like a live action porno. Like, I already get treated like a live action porno when I'm walking down the street carrying groceries. But I'm also not totally disconnected with how things are in other places. One, I travel a lot and have been to plenty of places where it's not OK to be openly gay. Two, I've lived in rural and religious places where it's not OK to be openly gay. Three, I am more plugged into the lives of LGB people in deeply homophobic parts of the world. These YouTubers seem to rarely discuss homophobia (outside of the coming out process) and the negative consequences of being openly gay.

This shit don't only destroy language, but the actual capability of gay and lesbian people to describe themselves and organize with each other. If you can't define what 'gay' is thn how are you going to fight for gay rights?

Yep, same issue as women right now. We are all losing the words to even explain what is happening to us. And dating apps are difficult right now too because it's getting increasingly more difficult to sift through the bullshit to find the women who are actually attracted to women.

[–]Shadow_Lurker 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's just that most of them are transplants and were born and raised elsewhere and presumably made the choice to move to LA where they could be more openly gay.

If this is the case, then they are even bigger twats then I thought.

They know the bullshit they are peddling is wrong, but do it anyway because fuck you.

Edit: there's also a third possibility: they might just be vomiting TQ talking points that they don't believe in just for clout.

I live in a liberal area too, so it's not like I fear bodily harm for being a lesbian here, but it's also not easy showing affection in public here because you may get treated like a live action porno. Like, I already get treated like a live action porno when I'm walking down the street carrying groceries.

It's no wonder why this still happens: most of these TQ identitarians love to fetishize lesbians. They reduce lesbianism to an abstract and amorphous thing that anyone can be, even though this alienates actual lesbians.

These YouTubers seem to rarely discuss homophobia outside of the coming out process and the negative consequences of being openly gay.

They are lifestyle YouTubers that larp as activists, even though they do nothing actually substantial for the causes they claim do push for. The actual struggles of gay and lesbian people have no place in their videos, mainly because they shatter the perception of an idealized uwu life they sell via their content.

This is part of the problem we are having today: the over idealization of gay/lesbian life is making frustrated straight people think that larping as gay/lesbian will solve all of their life problems then this isn't the case.

[–]reluctant_commenter 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But the emphasis by Carson McCalley on using the word "queer" for himself to remind himself to "keep the door open" to attraction to other types of people (read people of the opposite sex) weirded me out.

See, now that's just coming right out and saying it. THAT is why I am not "queer". All of these words, lesbian, gay, homosexual, are either being systematically erased or are having their boundaries eroded.

isn't it more helpful to yourself and to others you meet if you're a man who has only ever been attracted to men to use a word for yourself to convey specifically that?

I think that reality is legitimately offensive to some people, and they choose to believe that such people are just lying. "Hearts not parts" is the homophobic catchphrase of 2020.

[–]Eurowoman24 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

this is weird, I mean this sounds unfair to them and unfair to someone looking for a partner that's actually interested in them, not forcing themselves to be attracted to them. I'd be so weirded out if a gay man tried to force himself to be attracted to me, that's cringe. Ugh TQ activists are like that one person at a party that won't take no for an answer and tries to force themselves on you.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

No. I'm more creeped out by the casual use of "gays" in the title yet recognizing that "queer" is controversial. So hypocritical.

I can predict the article titles of 2025; "Hey you degenerate buttfucking fruity 𝗳𝗮𝗴𝘀, here's why words like 'homosexual' and 'queer' are super duper offensive to the ғᴀɢɢʏ community of disease-ridden gays uwu"

I really don't care if sexuality is "malleable." No, I hope it is, for my own sake. But I do care about blatant hypocrisy and that in the modern word, you can't exist for 5 minutes as a homosexual without being labeled something either offensive, and/or horribly inaccurate.

Even though I think the concept of "slurs" is stupid, and I've been known to call myself the f word and much worse things, I still think everyone has a right to not be thrown sensitive labels at even if the "majority of the LGBT+ community doesn't see them as bad." I don't dislike being called "queer" because it's offensive, I dislike it because it doesn't describe me. I am not a "queer person" because I can't relate to the "queer community." I am not a "LGBTQ+ person", because one I can't be all of those letters at once, and two, I do not relate to the "LGBTQ+ community." I don't dislike being called "a gay" because it's "a slur", I just think it's condescending and mocking and dumbing down/making fun of homosexuality. If you take power in it and like being called that, cool, but maybe don't go around calling everyone "Queer people" "The queers" or "the gays" because not only do those have a negative history, their modern uses aren't much better.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries"[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You are the only one I've ever heard have a problem with "Gays" used as shorthand, especially here when I was trying to shorten an already long post title, and where nothing we posted here belittles homosexuality. In your mind, can lesbians not also refer to ourselves as gay or "gay people?" I know certain gay men feel that way.

I am not accustomed to hearing "gays" used in slur form or treated as such by gay people. You are correct that I do see it used lightheartedly, but especially by gay people and I don't see that as a bad thing. It sounds like your dislike of "gays" and its lighthearted use is inherently tied to you disliking being gay in the first place. In any case, I see "gays" as entirely different from "Queer" and the discussion in this post is not how "Queer" is offensive, but rather is a combination of how meaningless it ends up being and how gay people are encouraged to call themselves "Queer" to discourage homosexuality.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Forgive my rudeness, but;

Where in the insanely privileged, cushy middle class, Keto diet eating, Protein shake drinking, Avacado toast eating, Queer theory studying west-coast "safe-space" ass neighborhood do you live where you've never heard "gays" used derogatorily, or heard people say "don't call me that?"

I have never, ever heard it in any other context that isn't 1. Directly derogatory, ie, the same way some speak about "the blacks", with an intent to dehumanize a group of people by using their sexuality as a noun to reduce them to it. 2. Condescending and jokey, ie, "The gays want X", which comes off as annoying and stereotypical

It's not grammatically correct, nor is it something I ever see used unless they are shitposting or trying to be offensive. I don't hear people talk about "the struggles of growing up as a gay" seriously, I only see "13 memes only the gays will understand sksksksksk yaaaas queen" or "Those vile gays are at it again"

No, this has nothing to do with that. Lesbians can call themselves gay. Bi men can call themselves gay. Hell even straight people can. I don't care. Even an individual can refer to themselves as "a gay" if they really want to (but they will almost always come off as non-serious and/or incredibly annoying.) It's when you refer to all homosexuals as "gays" that's the problem. Just like how "queer" is nonconsensually applied to all homosexuals these days.

I am not technically "gay" in the modern sense because, despite being homosexual, I don't fit in with gay men & "gay culture." So I may be homosexual but I am not "a gay." In the same way I am homosexual, but I am not "a queer" because I want nothing to do with "the queer community."

I think I have every right to say "No, I don't want to be called 'a gay'" as I do declining the word queer. I don't particularly like the word "gay" itself, because it's very much tied to slang and "gay community" which, like I said, I am not welcomed by nor want anything to do with. But "GayS" plural is the worst out of the three because it's deliberately condescending, non-serious, or actively trying to be discriminatory.

Like honestly I'm being 100% serious when I say I'd find being called the big spooky f word a lot less offensive here. At least that one I can laugh at, and I often use self deprecating jokes. "Queer" and "Gays" just associate me with something (stupid communities and stereotypes) that I am not, all while coming off as belittling.