Gay men's private campground

[BootmanLA]

1 minute ago, Ozbbbottom said:

So if lesbian women and transgender ppl allowed there they accept its a sex place and not then say wax not allowed 

This makes zero sense. 

[Spunkinmyarse]

So, if we can’t make distinctions based on gender because the differences between male and female are blurred and too insignificant anyway to warrant special treatment, then logically we can’t make distinctions based on sexual orientation either.  The differences between cis-gendered gay men and cis-gendered straight men are surely even less significant than the differences between cis-gendered males and cis-gendered females.

So by this argument, the very idea of a gay men’s campground is redundant: it should be open to all, including straight men and women. At which point is just becomes a campground.

Although that might be some people’s idea of a future utopia, I’m not sure I’m ready for that yet.  For the same reason that many women enjoy female-only ‘safe’ spaces because of the violence inflected on them by men, many gay men enjoy gay-male ‘safe’ spaces for the  same reason.  

By sheer dint of numbers, gay men in any campground open to all will always be a minority, and subjected to the societal norms of the majority, as is the case now.

By the way, for the record, I have not nailed my colours to the mast as to the original question of whether the owners of a gay men’s campground should (morally or legally) be allowed to exclude trans men: I’m simply using this this thread to follow the various arguments for and against to their logical conclusion, before I make up my mind. 

[Spunkinmyarse]

It’s just occurred to me that the campground in question probably doesn’t promote itself as ‘gay men only’, but just ‘men only’.  Perhaps someone can clarify?

Either way, if gender is being disallowed as a bar to entry (for reasons that it cannot be distinguished from race as a criterion for discrimination), then the campground in question would have to be open its door to women, and if sexual orientation is similarly disallowed, then straight men would inevitably follow, and we’re back to it being just another campground.

One thing I presume we’re all in agreement on is that the owners would at least be able to discriminate against minors?  So they could operate it as an ‘adults only’ campground, if nothing else.

Edited February 27, 2021 by Spunkinmyarse

[chipygmalion80]

1 hour ago, Spunkinmyarse said:

By the way, for the record, I have not nailed my colours to the mast as to the original question of whether the owners of a gay men’s campground should (morally or legally) be allowed to exclude trans men: I’m simply using this this thread to follow the various arguments for and against to their logical conclusion, before I make up my mind. 

I have.  Don't waste $ on such a place, aka. wallets speak.

I also wouldn't actively get friends / community boycotting the place.  It's private and their choice.

As someone whose been around trans and fucked trans, I don't understand why so many gays put up walls against pussy.  I've almost given up understanding.  Call me a pansexual hippie but this type of stuff will backfire.  Do gays like str8s building walls that ban gays?  Nope, but then gays take str8s to court over cakes, and come full circle to ban trans.

Do unto others as you'd have them do to you.

Edited February 27, 2021 by chipygmalion80
typo

[chipygmalion80]

4 minutes ago, Spunkinmyarse said:

One thing I presume we’re all in agreement on is that the owners would at least be able to discriminate against minors?  So they could operate it as an ‘adults only’ campground, if nothing else.

That is different.  Minors are a class of people and trans and gay and str8s.  But society, in general, has agreed that certain classes should be protected by BigGov.  The SubWay guy is an exception that we don't tolerate. 

Call me Libertarian or whatever slur but it's best to limit how much BigGov meddles in our choices; keep the laws to bare minimum, like protecting minors, and use our wallets to drive most other choices.

[Spunkinmyarse]

35 minutes ago, chipygmalion80 said:

Call me Libertarian or whatever slur but it's best to limit how much BigGov meddles in our choices; keep the laws to bare minimum, like protecting minors, and use our wallets to drive most other choices.

So just to be clear @chipygmalion80, you’re saying that you would defend the right of the campground owners to exclude trans, even though you find that approach distasteful on a personal level, and so would avoid supporting it financially?

Edited February 27, 2021 by Spunkinmyarse

[Guest]

Trans men are men, so I don't see any reason why they as men should be discriminated against visiting a male-only spaces.

[GoingEasy]

2 hours ago, Bisub said:

Trans men are men, so I don't see any reason why they as men should be discriminated against visiting a male-only spaces.

Bisub : I agree completely.

[Ozbbbottom]

All I’m saying if it’s gay Mens sex on premises .. will trans n lesbians get in and start to say no sex

[BootmanLA]

13 hours ago, Ozbbbottom said:

All I’m saying if it’s gay Mens sex on premises .. will trans n lesbians get in and start to say no sex

That's something the management can shut down easily. They can be told "This place allows that to happen; if you're not happy seeing it, you're welcome to leave."

And again, for what it's worth, there are gay trans men. The sex they have is gay sex, by definition. 

[chipygmalion80]

On 2/27/2021 at 9:13 AM, Spunkinmyarse said:

So just to be clear @chipygmalion80, you’re saying that you would defend the right of the campground owners to exclude trans, even though you find that approach distasteful on a personal level, and so would avoid supporting it financially?

Yup.