Men showing their transphobia

[PostingForTheFirstTime]

OK it's the DM, but it is the only newspaper I've found covering this (and also the Bari Weiss's Substack interview with American transgender medics Anderson and Bowers). Playboy readers' reactions to the magazine's latest cover, featuring a man. The genital preference is strong. Interesting (I've just noticed this) that it is in the femail section....

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10058109/Playboy-features-MALE-cover-star-dressed-bunny-October-issue.html

I don't understand what Playboy are doing. It's always been a magazine for straight men. Not that I think that having a magazine for other orientations is wrong. But why are they doing this? Is there such a huge, untapped market for "queer" publications?

At least he's not claiming to be a woman, though...and he is rather gorgeous. Why feature him in Playboy, though? I suspect because the controversy will get them mainstream attention and free publicity.....

I can't see LGBT people wanting to engage with the Playboy brand. I could be wrong though.

I agree - he looks fab.

What are they saying that is transphobic?

If you mean "knowing that a man is not a woman" I do not agree that is transphobia.

It's a fabulous image and strong, subversive magazine cover - reminds me of Rocky Horror. Hadn't heard of the model but he sounds interesting. However it's definitely a strange statement from Playboy of all things, considering. (Apart from the fact it's got everyone talking about it, obv.)

But yes, will be interesting to see what the men objecting will be told what they can do about it, won't it?

Its plain old fashioned homophobia more than transphobia (though of course a lot of male transphobia is based on homophobia) The readership would have objected to this gay man in any guise - and clearly he's a man, exposing his chest.

The DM is showing its sexism by having this odd fluff piece all about men in the 'femail' section - weird.

Playboy have a new target audience. They can't attract men now, that's absurd, men watch porn. Playboy is marketed to sell merchandise to teenage girls now. No one is better at teaching a teenage girl how to be sexually 'fully available' as an enthusiastic gay man. This is the new world.

Bretman is a gay young man who to the best of my knowledge is not trans.
He has a YouTube channel and a big following in the beauty community.
I suppose it's an odd cover star choice as the demographic of Playboy is thought of as heterosexuality male and I am wondering if a trans women would have actually provoked less comments.

@katemuff

Playboy have a new target audience. They can't attract men now, that's absurd, men watch porn. Playboy is marketed to sell merchandise to teenage girls now. No one is better at teaching a teenage girl how to be sexually 'fully available' as an enthusiastic gay man. This is the new world.

You're probably right, is that ghastly marketing trend still a thing? Grim.

It's a deliberate and cynical change of focus for a magazine on its arse, they must think it worth the risk. It's been years since I gave Playboy any thought whatsoever, so job done there.

PigletJohn - What are they saying that is transphobic?

I agree with you.

ErrolTheDragon - I don't see it as homophobia. None of the comments are objecting to his gayness, only to the publication's use of a gay man on the cover of a magazine targeted at straight men.

@PostingForTheFirstTime

ErrolTheDragon - I don't see it as homophobia. None of the comments are objecting to his gayness, only to the publication's use of a gay man on the cover of a magazine targeted at straight men.

Maybe - but I don't quite see how it's transphobia either, as the guy isn't trans.

It's just clickbait.

I'm with Errol on the homophobia verdict.

The men objecting to this want to see tits and ass - compliant, provocative, perennially available. They want it to fulfil their sexual fantasies, but also to validate their masculinity. I have no idea who actually buys Playboy in the age of porn on tap, but I'm guessing that Being Straight is a key part of their identity. They're not going to want to take this to the counter in the corner shop.

Males are affronted if they are not served females for their objectifications. They can get angry if their sexual requirements are not met.

Offering a male in place of the expected woman is not going to go down well. Yes, it's homophobia, old-fashioned homophobia.

If he were Trans, that would be quite interesting.

Haven't we all pointed out that it's only/mainly women who are beaten with the transphobic stick for knowing the difference between men and women? That it's Lesbians who are vilified for 'genital preference', when we all know that most straight men wouldn't consider sleeping with a Transwoman either - but for some reason no one calls all the straight men transphobic.

It would be quite subversive of Playboy to bring the issue to all the blokes' attention - who will obviously say "WTF, no way!"

But is is homophobia? Not wanting to be presented with a gay man as a sex object if you are straight seems perfectly reasonable to me?

I am setting aside all my objections re buyers of porn etc, etc, but I do think they are allowed to own their sexuality and its boundaries.

@katemuff

Playboy have a new target audience. They can't attract men now, that's absurd, men watch porn. Playboy is marketed to sell merchandise to teenage girls now. No one is better at teaching a teenage girl how to be sexually 'fully available' as an enthusiastic gay man. This is the new world.

That sounds entirely plausible to me. It would be interesting to know how magazines like Playboy have fared financially/circulation-wise since the rise of the internet (which has been filled with porn since Day 1). I can't imagine much of their income comes from magazine sales.

This is a dying brand performing it's swan song.

Heterosexual men are understandably complaining that it has taken a drastic swerve away from the way it usually courted them. But they won't give it a second thought because, as a PP days, the internet killed dirty magazines long ago. It's in the death throes. It'll go quiet again very soon.

@WorkingItOutAsIGo

But is is homophobia? Not wanting to be presented with a gay man as a sex object if you are straight seems perfectly reasonable to me?

I am setting aside all my objections re buyers of porn etc, etc, but I do think they are allowed to own their sexuality and its boundaries.

That's an interesting point and I don't disagree, but I think the whiff of homophobia is coming from the absolute aversion/revulsion in the comments.

A magazine that peddles erotica month after month for half a century or whatever must be in search of fresh takes on the tired old formula of crotchless panties and fetish gear to satisfy jaded palates and keep up with the times. I'm guessing there must be a fair bit of the content that doesn't appeal to the regular reader, which he flicks on past to find the blank-eyed wank fodder he's looking for. And doesn't threaten to cancel his subscription.

But I'm only speculating, and have spent way too much time pondering the inner workings of the incel mind than is healthy on a Tuesday morning

If he were Trans, that would be quite interesting.

Sports Illustrated had their first transwoman model on the cover a while back.

Men on social media not happy. Comment sections were actual 'transphobic binfires'.

Have a guess how many of those men were threatened with death and rape? Have a guess how many activists, (the type that are always lurking, ready to pounce when a woman says 'women have a cervix') turned up to demand these transphobic men better believe that TWAW, demand that they opened their bigoted minds and examined their preferences?

Have a guess...

for some reason no one calls all the straight men transphobic.

It's underway. It's in Srinivasan's Right to Sex where she calls upon everyone to problematise the nature of their desire and interrogate it for what it reveals about their biases and prejudices.

We need to move beyond 'yes and no', wanted and unwanted. We need to rethink sex as a political phenomenon.

tbh, such scrutiny would extinguish any scintilla of libido or desire for me. Perhaps other people might have stronger drives that would survive such intense problematising.

And, I can't get pass the feeling this is yet another coercive tool and we've seen so much of that surface in one form or another.

[quote PostingForTheFirstTime]OK it's the DM, but it is the only newspaper I've found covering this (and also the Bari Weiss's Substack interview with American transgender medics Anderson and Bowers). Playboy readers' reactions to the magazine's latest cover, featuring a man. The genital preference is strong. Interesting (I've just noticed this) that it is in the femail section....

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10058109/Playboy-features-MALE-cover-star-dressed-bunny-October-issue.html[/quote]
How is this "transphobia"? Most men are attracted to women, probably all of Playboy's readership are attracted to women, some might be attracted to men and women. I don't see it as transphobic if a man is only attracted to women who are actually, genetically women, rather than a man who says he/she is a woman.

From the article, Playboy is digital only now so is presumably fighting for survival and relevance any way it can get it. Wonder if they'd have made this decision if there was still a physical copy to shift. Sign of the times really.

How is this "transphobia"? Most men are attracted to women, probably all of Playboy's readership are attracted to women, some might be attracted to men and women. I don't see it as transphobic if a man is only attracted to women who are actually, genetically women, rather than a man who says he/she is a woman.

The point OP is trying to make us that woman HAVE been accused of transphobia for exactly that reason; specifically lesbians who aren’t attracted to / don’t want to have sex with trans women.