Queer people are not my concern. My concern is the flourishing happiness of my gay brothers. Community cannot be sustained by either the experience of nor opposition to oppression. Sooner or later people have to build something positive and nourishing to foster connectedness. Actual gay men need not be whipping boys for the problems of others. Actual gay men cannot flourish without attending to their own needs and dreams. I will no longer tolerate queer colonization of my life.
Thank you. I agree we need to build something positive and nourishing to foster connectedness. Love and respect is our way out of this, not further demonization based on identity.
One of the strategies I think is to focus on issues of concern to Gays but either neglected or avoided by the LGBTQXYZ+ people. This was an early post and it is just a few things.
Great piece Mike! When I was hired in 1996 to turn around the financially struggling Out magazine, an LGBTQ lifestyle publication, I said that the groups represented by those letters had the same things in common as Mexican immigrants and Chinese immigrants: Legal and political issues. A magazine with lesbian fashion spreads wasn't going to get the attention of gay men, or the fashion brands that wanted to reach them. I turned it into a gay men's lifestyle magazine, and that made it profitable. My point is, as you make clear, we need to acknowledge that we are not an LGBTQ community. We are communities, with a need to come together to fight for our rights. But our rights include the right to live our own lives as gay men, as lesbians, and as trans and bisexual people.
And if we reject critical theory analysis? Systems of oppression, privilege, intersectionality are all just opportunities to wallow in victimhood and feel entitled to hijack the accomplishments of others. Gays used to create our own support organizations. Now those same organizations demonize us and weep over Palestine. WTF, dude?
Strange times for gay men. Personally, I feel culturlly untethered. No room for my voice at the LGBTQ+ shin dig. But I’m hopeful, we have been demonized before and know how to build the services gay men want and need. AND Gay men can continue to support the rest of the alphabet, but now the scene will have boundaries and conscent.
I can understand your point of frustration, but by voicing concerns of "what about white cis gay men", isn't that in itself perpetuating gender identity ideologies (which in itself is an oxymoron)? It seems to me this writing was done in a reactionary manner and fails to consider the context and reasoning of why white cis gay men are excluded in certain settings, but ultimately that boils down to whether one wants safety for the bubble they have drawn for themselves, or one wants to dismantle the oppressive system that endangers their safety and everyone else's in the first place. I do believe demonizing and blaming any subgroup is merely virtue signaling and creates no progress, but it's up to the privileged to reconcile with their privileges and create environments to advocate for the underprivileged.
Hi Mike, thank you for your thought-provoking piece, and for your many years of service and advocacy for the LGBTQ+ community. Knowing you personally, I know that everything you've written here is thoughtful, compassionate, and with your vast experience I can only defer to you on how these political organizations have acted and silenced dissent. I'll take you at your word on that. You have always been very generous with your time and energy, so before I say anything too controversial, I just wanted to say thank you for everything. :)
That said, I’d like to reflect on some of your points, particularly the phrase: “Same-sex attracted people need to shut up and move to the back of the line.”
Being that this was said in context of an LGBTQ coalition, it seems like you are saying that gay and lesbian individuals are being especially victimized by people who aren't cisgender being prioritized. But are transgender people not being told to “get to the back of the line” every single day? I'm not talking about political organizations, I'm talking about someone who just wants to live their life without threats to their safety. They are disproportionately targeted in political rhetoric and legislation with words like "eradicate" becoming commonplace, and, ironically, even some of the most loyal supporters of progressive politics have scapegoated them. I’ve heard die-hard Democrats argue that transgender rights “caused” Trump’s second term, despite the fact that transgender issues were not at all a focal point of Democratic platforms in presidential elections. The only people talking about transgender people were Republicans. If completely ignoring transgender people in the election wasn't strategic enough, what are we talking about? Joining in on the abuse? More laws that tell parents that the state knows better than they do about how to care for their child in crisis?
I absolutely agree that there's value in having dedicated spaces for specific communities and identities—it's essential for celebrating culture, fostering community, and advocating for specific needs. But criticizing the need for a broader coalition is different. When we leave the most vulnerable members of our community to advocate for themselves, it’s a relinquishment of our moral duty to stand against bigotry in all its forms.
Nonwhite trans individuals were at the forefront of our fight for equality, and I cannot imagine turning my back on them now. Their contributions, both historically and in our present struggles, demand our solidarity. The description of your piece as "What it feels like to get nothing from LGBTQ+ gender identity ideology culture" seems to be forgetting some significant history. We need to build and maintain coalitions that uplift everyone, because when we narrow our focus to prioritize our comfort over their safety, we risk abandoning the very principles that brought us here. If we are saying the Democratic party wasn't sufficiently transphobic to compete with the Republican party, then I don't know what the Democratic party is, and I won't be a part of it.
(To clarify, when I said "our comfort" I specifically meant abandoning our trans allies just because some people might irrationally demonize us for our diverse perspectives. It happens, it sucks, but it isn't reason to concede our values. If multiple people have made you feel evil just based on immutable characteristics you were born with, that's undeniably wrong, but bound to happen in political speech. Don't let it affect you too much.)
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts and for starting this conversation. And I hope you have a great time! Sending all the love. :)
Your thoughtful comments, especially your empathy, are deeply appreciated. This kind of dialog helps us all better understand one another. Understanding is more important than agreeing. Understanding keeps the conversation going while insisting on agreement pushes us into camps.
Thank you for modeling how to disagree about ideas and policy rather than using personal attacks, which get us nowhere.
So, respectfully, this is my response.
I stand by my statement that the contemporary LGBTQ+ ideology requires: “Same-sex attracted people need to shut up and move to the back of the line.” We are not being victimized. We are being ignored.
The key word in that sentence is “contemporary.”
In the old days, when I moved to LA (1991), we had a Gay and Lesbian Center.
What’s missing in the contemporary LGBTQ+ coalition is the word “AND.”
We can do more than one thing at once. We can support trans people AND gay men, etc. The Ls AND the Gs AND the Bs AND the Ts AND the Qs all have specific needs discreet to their cohorts.
I will no longer play the Victim Olympics, which requires the sum of our coalition’s recourses to go to the winner. The LA LGBT Center has a $150 million dollar budget, and there is not a single program for gay men. Look at the website. WTF? How much does it cost to have a discussion group in a conference room?
I’m hearing a lot about trans involvement in gay history that is different from my 44 years of experience embedded in the culture. I’m currently 59. I attended my first gay rights group when I was 15.
The most useful thing I’ve ever heard from a gender-nonconforming person was Terry Sue's statement, “Honey, go where the love is.”
There is no love for same-sex attracted people coming from the contemporary LGBTQ+ coalition. Quite the opposite, actually.
And…regarding the US election:
Republicans are not the only ones talking about trans issues.
One very notable Democrat, President Biden, signed an order affecting Title 9, which made it possible for a child who was a 16-year-old boy one day to be a 16-year-old girl the next day and compete against cis girls in high school sports.
Also, the progressive ideology plank that moved a lot of men to MAGA is the insistence that men are inherently “toxic.” Most men do not want to wear that label.
I’ll just leave that there.
Much love to you, my friend. I look forward to a continued dialog on this and many other topics—hopefully, the subject of what will serve gay men will be discussed at some point. : )
Mike, thank you for such a thoughtful reply. You've helped me understand your perspective better, especially regarding the LA LGBT Center. A $150 million budget with zero programs for gay men? That's shocking. You're absolutely right - we need that "AND." Supporting one group shouldn't mean abandoning another, regardless of who is having a harder time getting by.
I appreciate you sharing your 44 years of lived experience. When I read your original piece, I think I filtered it through my current anxieties about the increasing hostility toward trans people in the media and politics. I know lovely trans people who face real challenges just existing in public spaces. Just a couple of weeks ago, I saw a Planet Fitness post on Instagram offering shower facilities to LA fire evacuees, and the comments section was flooded with people claiming trans women would assault people in the showers. This kind of baseless hysteria - turning victims into imagined perpetrators without a shred of evidence - is exactly what keeps hitting nerves with me. It's the same playbook that was used against gay men for decades.
Regarding Title IX and sports - you make a fair point. It's fascinating how this relatively narrow issue about school sports became such a flashpoint. The cynical part of me wants to ask where all this concern for women's sports was before trans athletes entered the conversation. I suspect most of these arguments weren't made in good faith - the same people claiming to protect girls' sports often oppose policies that would actually help young women. The bathroom bills of a decade ago failed, but sports tested well in focus groups, so it became the new obsession despite Democrats never really defending trans people at all. What should have been a specific policy discussion somehow morphed into a broader attack on trans people's right to exist in public - and I bet most trans kids just want to get through school without any attention, let alone compete in sports.
On the topic of "toxic masculinity" - I think there's an important distinction between critiquing harmful aspects of masculine culture (like how men commit about 90% of homicides, make up the vast majority of mass shooters, and perpetrate roughly 98% of sexual assaults and rapes, etc.) and declaring all men inherently toxic from the moment they are born. The latter is obviously wrong, and I don't think I have ever seen anyone say anything like that outside of a joke. Shouldn't we be able to discuss how certain cultural expectations of masculinity contribute to violence without it being seen as an attack on men themselves? Women can't decide whether to be pregnant or not, but our main takeaway from the election is that we aren't being sensitive enough to men... who feel bad... about being reminded of the power they have.
Most importantly though, I'm grateful to better understand that your critique is focused on organizational priorities and political structures rather than supporting or opposing any individual group's basic rights and dignity. The idea that we can fight for multiple causes at once, that it's "AND" not "OR" - that's exactly what we need more of.
Looking forward to continuing this dialogue, especially about how we can better serve gay men's needs without diminishing support for others. Your experience and perspective are valuable, even (especially) when they challenge my assumptions. ❤️
“Nonwhite trans individuals were at the forefront of our fight for equality, and I cannot imagine turning my back on them now.” I give the trans community exactly the same support they’ve always given to the gay community. That would be none.
Steve, respectfully, I have to push back on this. Trans folks were right there with us during Stonewall and the early days of our movement. They were on the front lines, often facing even worse treatment than cis gay people because they were more visible targets.
When you ask "what have they done for me lately," what are we actually asking them to do? Even the few trans people who've made it into government positions can barely walk a hallway without causing a panic. It's kind of hard to be fighting other people's battles when you're just trying to exist while being turned into a political boogeyman.
Plus, why does support have to be transactional? "I'll only stand up for your rights if you've done something for me" isn't solidarity, it's MAGA vibes. Is that the blueprint we want?
We're not in some competition where trans rights somehow take away from gay rights. Or are we? I know that I don't know everything. This attitude confuses me, but I'm seeing it a lot lately.
Have you noticed how a lot of the fear-mongering about trans people sounds exactly like what they used to say (and some still say) about gay people? When we start splitting up and throwing each other under the bus, we're just making it easier for people who'd rather none of us had rights at all. Sure, different parts of our community have different needs and priorities. That's fine! But saying there was never any support between trans and gay folks isn't just wrong... it's forgetting our own history.
Timothy, I have to push back there. The claimed presence of trans POC at stonewall is rank historical revisionism. Unfortunately it’s par with the incessant colonization of all things gay that’s the hallmark of the trans community. It’s been so throughly debunked that continuing to push the lie is itself homophobic.
But what about all those groups - like the Meet-up ones - that gather individuals of any persuasion, based on a shared passion? Facebook has them as well, tho' I've never er honied one. I don't doubt that the demographic-focused groups you refer to DO exist, but that's only one part of a bigger whole.
how toxic cis gay men are to other queer people? Mostly because of their own internalized misogyny.
Feeling bad that whiteness isn’t celebrated in plant medicine circles? We literally obliterated the indigenous people whose traditions you now enjoy. Sure, some social justice types take it too far, but ask yourself, truly, who has the power and money in queer circles. Get over yourself! Signed, a white gay man.
Thank you for your comment. It illustrates the points I made about identity politics.
You say cis gay men = bad, misogynistic, and toxic
I am asking for all facets of diversity to be celebrated, including my own cis white gayness. I am asking for the diversity I bring to the group to be met with a modicum of empathy. I am asking us all to love each other and treat each other with respect.
Queer people are not my concern. My concern is the flourishing happiness of my gay brothers. Community cannot be sustained by either the experience of nor opposition to oppression. Sooner or later people have to build something positive and nourishing to foster connectedness. Actual gay men need not be whipping boys for the problems of others. Actual gay men cannot flourish without attending to their own needs and dreams. I will no longer tolerate queer colonization of my life.
Thank you. I agree we need to build something positive and nourishing to foster connectedness. Love and respect is our way out of this, not further demonization based on identity.
When you get back we need to start organizing.
I look forward to that Edward.
One of the strategies I think is to focus on issues of concern to Gays but either neglected or avoided by the LGBTQXYZ+ people. This was an early post and it is just a few things.
https://edwardhsebesta.substack.com/p/bypassing-the-queer-inc-media-alternatives
I look forward to reading how the conference went
Great piece Mike! When I was hired in 1996 to turn around the financially struggling Out magazine, an LGBTQ lifestyle publication, I said that the groups represented by those letters had the same things in common as Mexican immigrants and Chinese immigrants: Legal and political issues. A magazine with lesbian fashion spreads wasn't going to get the attention of gay men, or the fashion brands that wanted to reach them. I turned it into a gay men's lifestyle magazine, and that made it profitable. My point is, as you make clear, we need to acknowledge that we are not an LGBTQ community. We are communities, with a need to come together to fight for our rights. But our rights include the right to live our own lives as gay men, as lesbians, and as trans and bisexual people.
And if we reject critical theory analysis? Systems of oppression, privilege, intersectionality are all just opportunities to wallow in victimhood and feel entitled to hijack the accomplishments of others. Gays used to create our own support organizations. Now those same organizations demonize us and weep over Palestine. WTF, dude?
Strange times for gay men. Personally, I feel culturlly untethered. No room for my voice at the LGBTQ+ shin dig. But I’m hopeful, we have been demonized before and know how to build the services gay men want and need. AND Gay men can continue to support the rest of the alphabet, but now the scene will have boundaries and conscent.
I can understand your point of frustration, but by voicing concerns of "what about white cis gay men", isn't that in itself perpetuating gender identity ideologies (which in itself is an oxymoron)? It seems to me this writing was done in a reactionary manner and fails to consider the context and reasoning of why white cis gay men are excluded in certain settings, but ultimately that boils down to whether one wants safety for the bubble they have drawn for themselves, or one wants to dismantle the oppressive system that endangers their safety and everyone else's in the first place. I do believe demonizing and blaming any subgroup is merely virtue signaling and creates no progress, but it's up to the privileged to reconcile with their privileges and create environments to advocate for the underprivileged.
Hi Mike, thank you for your thought-provoking piece, and for your many years of service and advocacy for the LGBTQ+ community. Knowing you personally, I know that everything you've written here is thoughtful, compassionate, and with your vast experience I can only defer to you on how these political organizations have acted and silenced dissent. I'll take you at your word on that. You have always been very generous with your time and energy, so before I say anything too controversial, I just wanted to say thank you for everything. :)
That said, I’d like to reflect on some of your points, particularly the phrase: “Same-sex attracted people need to shut up and move to the back of the line.”
Being that this was said in context of an LGBTQ coalition, it seems like you are saying that gay and lesbian individuals are being especially victimized by people who aren't cisgender being prioritized. But are transgender people not being told to “get to the back of the line” every single day? I'm not talking about political organizations, I'm talking about someone who just wants to live their life without threats to their safety. They are disproportionately targeted in political rhetoric and legislation with words like "eradicate" becoming commonplace, and, ironically, even some of the most loyal supporters of progressive politics have scapegoated them. I’ve heard die-hard Democrats argue that transgender rights “caused” Trump’s second term, despite the fact that transgender issues were not at all a focal point of Democratic platforms in presidential elections. The only people talking about transgender people were Republicans. If completely ignoring transgender people in the election wasn't strategic enough, what are we talking about? Joining in on the abuse? More laws that tell parents that the state knows better than they do about how to care for their child in crisis?
I absolutely agree that there's value in having dedicated spaces for specific communities and identities—it's essential for celebrating culture, fostering community, and advocating for specific needs. But criticizing the need for a broader coalition is different. When we leave the most vulnerable members of our community to advocate for themselves, it’s a relinquishment of our moral duty to stand against bigotry in all its forms.
Nonwhite trans individuals were at the forefront of our fight for equality, and I cannot imagine turning my back on them now. Their contributions, both historically and in our present struggles, demand our solidarity. The description of your piece as "What it feels like to get nothing from LGBTQ+ gender identity ideology culture" seems to be forgetting some significant history. We need to build and maintain coalitions that uplift everyone, because when we narrow our focus to prioritize our comfort over their safety, we risk abandoning the very principles that brought us here. If we are saying the Democratic party wasn't sufficiently transphobic to compete with the Republican party, then I don't know what the Democratic party is, and I won't be a part of it.
(To clarify, when I said "our comfort" I specifically meant abandoning our trans allies just because some people might irrationally demonize us for our diverse perspectives. It happens, it sucks, but it isn't reason to concede our values. If multiple people have made you feel evil just based on immutable characteristics you were born with, that's undeniably wrong, but bound to happen in political speech. Don't let it affect you too much.)
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts and for starting this conversation. And I hope you have a great time! Sending all the love. :)
Timmy, I’m so happy you’re on Substack!
Your thoughtful comments, especially your empathy, are deeply appreciated. This kind of dialog helps us all better understand one another. Understanding is more important than agreeing. Understanding keeps the conversation going while insisting on agreement pushes us into camps.
Thank you for modeling how to disagree about ideas and policy rather than using personal attacks, which get us nowhere.
So, respectfully, this is my response.
I stand by my statement that the contemporary LGBTQ+ ideology requires: “Same-sex attracted people need to shut up and move to the back of the line.” We are not being victimized. We are being ignored.
The key word in that sentence is “contemporary.”
In the old days, when I moved to LA (1991), we had a Gay and Lesbian Center.
What’s missing in the contemporary LGBTQ+ coalition is the word “AND.”
We can do more than one thing at once. We can support trans people AND gay men, etc. The Ls AND the Gs AND the Bs AND the Ts AND the Qs all have specific needs discreet to their cohorts.
I will no longer play the Victim Olympics, which requires the sum of our coalition’s recourses to go to the winner. The LA LGBT Center has a $150 million dollar budget, and there is not a single program for gay men. Look at the website. WTF? How much does it cost to have a discussion group in a conference room?
I’m hearing a lot about trans involvement in gay history that is different from my 44 years of experience embedded in the culture. I’m currently 59. I attended my first gay rights group when I was 15.
The most useful thing I’ve ever heard from a gender-nonconforming person was Terry Sue's statement, “Honey, go where the love is.”
There is no love for same-sex attracted people coming from the contemporary LGBTQ+ coalition. Quite the opposite, actually.
And…regarding the US election:
Republicans are not the only ones talking about trans issues.
One very notable Democrat, President Biden, signed an order affecting Title 9, which made it possible for a child who was a 16-year-old boy one day to be a 16-year-old girl the next day and compete against cis girls in high school sports.
Also, the progressive ideology plank that moved a lot of men to MAGA is the insistence that men are inherently “toxic.” Most men do not want to wear that label.
I’ll just leave that there.
Much love to you, my friend. I look forward to a continued dialog on this and many other topics—hopefully, the subject of what will serve gay men will be discussed at some point. : )
Mike, thank you for such a thoughtful reply. You've helped me understand your perspective better, especially regarding the LA LGBT Center. A $150 million budget with zero programs for gay men? That's shocking. You're absolutely right - we need that "AND." Supporting one group shouldn't mean abandoning another, regardless of who is having a harder time getting by.
I appreciate you sharing your 44 years of lived experience. When I read your original piece, I think I filtered it through my current anxieties about the increasing hostility toward trans people in the media and politics. I know lovely trans people who face real challenges just existing in public spaces. Just a couple of weeks ago, I saw a Planet Fitness post on Instagram offering shower facilities to LA fire evacuees, and the comments section was flooded with people claiming trans women would assault people in the showers. This kind of baseless hysteria - turning victims into imagined perpetrators without a shred of evidence - is exactly what keeps hitting nerves with me. It's the same playbook that was used against gay men for decades.
Regarding Title IX and sports - you make a fair point. It's fascinating how this relatively narrow issue about school sports became such a flashpoint. The cynical part of me wants to ask where all this concern for women's sports was before trans athletes entered the conversation. I suspect most of these arguments weren't made in good faith - the same people claiming to protect girls' sports often oppose policies that would actually help young women. The bathroom bills of a decade ago failed, but sports tested well in focus groups, so it became the new obsession despite Democrats never really defending trans people at all. What should have been a specific policy discussion somehow morphed into a broader attack on trans people's right to exist in public - and I bet most trans kids just want to get through school without any attention, let alone compete in sports.
On the topic of "toxic masculinity" - I think there's an important distinction between critiquing harmful aspects of masculine culture (like how men commit about 90% of homicides, make up the vast majority of mass shooters, and perpetrate roughly 98% of sexual assaults and rapes, etc.) and declaring all men inherently toxic from the moment they are born. The latter is obviously wrong, and I don't think I have ever seen anyone say anything like that outside of a joke. Shouldn't we be able to discuss how certain cultural expectations of masculinity contribute to violence without it being seen as an attack on men themselves? Women can't decide whether to be pregnant or not, but our main takeaway from the election is that we aren't being sensitive enough to men... who feel bad... about being reminded of the power they have.
Most importantly though, I'm grateful to better understand that your critique is focused on organizational priorities and political structures rather than supporting or opposing any individual group's basic rights and dignity. The idea that we can fight for multiple causes at once, that it's "AND" not "OR" - that's exactly what we need more of.
Looking forward to continuing this dialogue, especially about how we can better serve gay men's needs without diminishing support for others. Your experience and perspective are valuable, even (especially) when they challenge my assumptions. ❤️
“Nonwhite trans individuals were at the forefront of our fight for equality, and I cannot imagine turning my back on them now.” I give the trans community exactly the same support they’ve always given to the gay community. That would be none.
Steve, respectfully, I have to push back on this. Trans folks were right there with us during Stonewall and the early days of our movement. They were on the front lines, often facing even worse treatment than cis gay people because they were more visible targets.
When you ask "what have they done for me lately," what are we actually asking them to do? Even the few trans people who've made it into government positions can barely walk a hallway without causing a panic. It's kind of hard to be fighting other people's battles when you're just trying to exist while being turned into a political boogeyman.
Plus, why does support have to be transactional? "I'll only stand up for your rights if you've done something for me" isn't solidarity, it's MAGA vibes. Is that the blueprint we want?
We're not in some competition where trans rights somehow take away from gay rights. Or are we? I know that I don't know everything. This attitude confuses me, but I'm seeing it a lot lately.
Have you noticed how a lot of the fear-mongering about trans people sounds exactly like what they used to say (and some still say) about gay people? When we start splitting up and throwing each other under the bus, we're just making it easier for people who'd rather none of us had rights at all. Sure, different parts of our community have different needs and priorities. That's fine! But saying there was never any support between trans and gay folks isn't just wrong... it's forgetting our own history.
Timothy, I have to push back there. The claimed presence of trans POC at stonewall is rank historical revisionism. Unfortunately it’s par with the incessant colonization of all things gay that’s the hallmark of the trans community. It’s been so throughly debunked that continuing to push the lie is itself homophobic.
But what about all those groups - like the Meet-up ones - that gather individuals of any persuasion, based on a shared passion? Facebook has them as well, tho' I've never er honied one. I don't doubt that the demographic-focused groups you refer to DO exist, but that's only one part of a bigger whole.
Wow! Poor you! Are you really so blind to
how toxic cis gay men are to other queer people? Mostly because of their own internalized misogyny.
Feeling bad that whiteness isn’t celebrated in plant medicine circles? We literally obliterated the indigenous people whose traditions you now enjoy. Sure, some social justice types take it too far, but ask yourself, truly, who has the power and money in queer circles. Get over yourself! Signed, a white gay man.
Thank you for your comment. It illustrates the points I made about identity politics.
You say cis gay men = bad, misogynistic, and toxic
I am asking for all facets of diversity to be celebrated, including my own cis white gayness. I am asking for the diversity I bring to the group to be met with a modicum of empathy. I am asking us all to love each other and treat each other with respect.
misogyny AND misandry
Both exist