What the f*#k is a g0y?
My, my. Very few things surprise me. And recently this one did: the concept of a g0y. Simply put, a “g0y” (yes, spelled with a zero, not the letter “o”) is a guy who is into other guys, but refuses to be classified as gay. Hmmm… I want to suspend judgement, for now. But let me share this piece of information I found about this topic.
From g0ys.org: G0ys are guys who find men physically & emotionally attractive, but (for whatever reason) are offended with the stigmas that currently define the ‘gay community’ in the public psyche. G0YS recognize that the “gay-male” community tends to embrace every gender-bending act, fetish & affectation; –And include those things in the general specter of the image that “gay” projects publicly. The easiest to observe example is the commonly used acronym “GLIT” (sometimes “GLIB”) meaning Gay, Lesbian, Intersexed, Transgendered (or BiSexual). The fact that “GAY” is grouped with “Intersexed & Transgendered” is evidence to our primary point showing what the term “GAY” has morphed into. G0YS reject those associations completely & consider it a form of prejudice against men who love men.
Behaviorally: Anal-sex is innately shunned by g0ys - as it represents the ultimate form of sexual disrespect whether male/male or male/female. Other distasteful stereotypes include (but are not limited to): Effeminate behavior, extreme passivity (like cowardice) & drag. G0YS don’t call other men “girl”, “bitch”, “queen”, etc.
Whew. I need to recover before I actually write more. For now, let me digest this, and I’ll get back to you. Or maybe share your thoughts here. Are there Pinoy G0ys out there?
Possibly Related Entries:
- No related posts
September 18th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
hmmmm funny how people
chose to be labeled.
hehehe…
proud be g0y!
September 26th, 2006 at 4:50 pm
g0y…poor g0ys…did they actually think people will soon associate the name with homos–notwithstanding any elaborate explanation that they are not like, the uhm, traditional, culturally maligned gay men. do you honsetly believe that taking on another label will actually change the way the world looks at you? who said you had to conform to everything gay men in general do? even the heteros out there have diferent ways of living. gay men can live without anal sex and not call his friend girl, queer or bitch and still be comfortably be gay. i can comfortably say that it is no less than self-hatred that drove you people to start calling yourselves by another name. when mainstream culture. your calling yourself by another name is just another divisive move that perpetuates bigotry and homophobia among the general populace.
healthy aversion? since when was hatred ever healthy?
anal sex a representation of the ultimate form of sexual disrespect? only if you force it on another. you don’t have to like it just because gay men like it in general.
gay men don’t have to be effeminate, they don;t have to be cowards and they don’t have to like drag. i for one was never effeminate, nor was ever a coward if by that they mean they can’t slug it out with other men and iu have never liked to dress in drag. but damn i’m okay with the way i am. i don’t engage in spetacular pronouncements aboutmy preferences but i make it known when i am asked or when i choose to. in my opinion, the g0ys ARE cowards for not having enough courage to show that they have their own choice as individuals. in the gay community, you are still and can still be an individual, in case you missed the whole point of being human.
i’m betting my ass that in a few months, the g0y phenom will have gone and its propagators taken on another name kasi kung ano na naman ang maaassociate sa, uhm, pag ka-g0y nila.
September 26th, 2006 at 7:07 pm
henry i can see you are so passionate about what you wrote. thanks for dropping, i appreciate your sharing your thoughts.
October 30th, 2006 at 2:15 pm
yeah, I hear ya’. I joined a bunch of their e-mail lists, in part out of curiosity, and quite frankly, I really lost my old taste for anal for personal reasons (btw, I’m HIV-, so my reasons eschewing anal are personal, albeit atypical). But quite frankly, they strike me as a bunch of Gender Fascists who believe themselves to be too macho to “really be gay” — hell, I’m sure the middle-aged Transsexuals I know can think of more gender-therapists that would expect *less* gender-conformity before an SRS reccomendation.
November 27th, 2006 at 5:25 pm
labels, labels… does it realy matter? besides hindi mo naman pwedeng i-explain sa lahat ng tao kung ano ka nga talaga… what’s important is that you know who you are and that you are not causing pain to another human being…
frankly, these labels confuse me… i don’t even know “where i belong” but as i’ve said, i know who i am… but can anyone tell me “where i belong”… am i gay, g0y, bi or what?!?!?
i am still unable to come out, not sure how people around me would take it… but i know what i want and who i am… i get attracted to men, sucked a few c****… tried anal but didn’t really appreciate it much. but i still get aroused by girls, attracted to a few. so, what am i?
December 11th, 2006 at 9:04 am
Some interesting comments posted here on the whole ‘g0y’ debate. Personally I don’t see the need for another label, I mean are people so shallow that they feel the need to ‘belong’? We seem to live in an age where success is determined by the brand of clothes you wear, the make of car you drive, the genre of music you listen to. And sexuality is no different. As much as I would like to live in a country where you weren’t shunned because of your race, religion or sexuality, its probably never going to happen. I’ve lived in northern ireland all my live and as much as i love this little country, it can be so naive at times. I grew up in the bible bashing heartland so whenever it was determined that i was gay, attitudes towards me changed. People who have known me for years changed the way they acted around me even though i hadn’t changed my behaviour at all. Guys became more distant and would try to jokingly make puns at every opportunity whereas girls would fight over me to be their “faghag”. I don’t want that type of treatment. I don’t like shopping for make-up and perfume or feel that the only place i can go drinking is a gay bar. The majority of peoples attitudes stink whenever they come across anything different so theyre likely to look to the media for guidance, ie tabloid newspapers who jump from one bandwagon to the next. I personaly think people should just be accepted for who they are, not for their profession, the amount of money they have, who they are attracted to etc. I could rant on about this subject but i’d probably just go off at a tangent. Would love to hear how other people feel.
December 24th, 2006 at 1:05 am
Let me begin by saying that the actual moniker they came up with (”g0y”) is painfully stupid. The only reasonable way to translate it into spoken language would be to say “goy” which any reasonably cosmopolitan individual will take to mean “not Jewish.” It’s just silly.
That said, however, I think most people I’ve read criticize this ‘movement’ are missing the point entirely. I really don’t think a g0y would adopt such a label in hopes that the world will change it’s attitude towards him. He probably could care less what the world thinks.
Personally, I fit the model they’re espousing, and have since I can remember being alive. As with anything similar, it’s kind of liberating to find that there are others who think and feel as you do. It’s tough to navigate the waters of ‘growing up gay’ when your internal concept of self is so very much at odds with the gay culture you’re confronted with every day. If I had had this label, silly as it is, when I was much younger, life might not have seemed so bleak. It may have taken me far less time to come to terms with my gay identity.
At the root of it, I think all they’re saying is that social gender affectations, like effeminism for example, are completely seperate from sexual orientation. There are effeminate heterosexuals. There are masculine homosexuals. Sounds simple, but it’s grossly at odds with the dominant “Will-and-Grace” stereotype that seems to be forced upon us from every quarter. They don’t seem to be denying that they enjoy sex with men. They are denying that they’re feminine, and would rather not be forced to be feminine in order to be gay. What could be wrong with that?
January 4th, 2007 at 10:58 am
first. I want to congratulate whoever the author/contributor of this very gay-friendly blog. I am always having fun visiting this site. Thank you!!!
Second. The article above seems to be very debatable. Yeah. Diversity seems to have caused this labeling within the gay community and with that labeling, a lot of complications arose, also, within the gay community. As what other readers had said, I do believe that label is not really important although it gives us a clear-cut definition of who we are, in other words, of our identity. But since we are part of the gay community, it is reasonable enough for everyone to be called “GAY”,period. kasi nga part na tayo nito. Gets ninyo ba point ko. Bakit ka pa naging parte ng gay community kung hindi mo naman amin sa sarili mo na isa kang gay. Basta ako, I am gay and I am proud to be part of this minority, soon to become part of the MAJORITY!!! hehe…
Third. Related pa rin sa topic of g0y and label churva, I am working with a research paper right now.It is about the “LABELING within the GAY COMMUNITY” .SO sobrang thankful ako lalo na sa author ng blog na ito na kahit papaano may online resource ako na nakita, (specifically online blog). I promise to the author of this blog na iaacknowledge ko talaga siya sa aking paper para walang plagiarism na mangyari. ANd siyempre, I hope all the readers of this wonderful blog will continue to share their comments, suggestions, reactions about this concern. Thanks sa inyong lahat and be proud!!! Iboto natin ANG LADLAD sa kongreso!!!
January 4th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Sure, there are Pinoy G0ys out here. I respect all genders, male female, gays, lesbians. But I’m a g0y and bisexual. But I like the idea of G0ys, now whatever this is, we just have to pay respect to ourselves and respect others as well.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
I’ve read a number of comments here and recognized words like “painfully stupid”, “cowards”, “silly”. I take it as not getting a label or whatever. I take it as defining oneself. To solidly do so is to know oneself better. No one is shoving this idea to anyone. If you’re not at it then you’re not. If some people are then so be it. But please…. stop throwing stones to people. It’s degrading to the one thrown at and much more to the one casting the stone. Again my say is ….RESPECT. That’s all there is to make this a better community.
February 24th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
HOPE ITS NOT TOO LATE TO COMMENT ON THIS TOPIC..
NO MATTER WHAT THEY WANT TO BE CALLED,, THEY WILL STILL SUCK D**KS AND F*CK ASSES..
March 16th, 2007 at 1:02 am
Clearly the person who wrote “NO MATTER WHAT THEY WANT TO BE CALLED,, THEY WILL STILL SUCK D**KS AND F*CK ASSES..” doesn’t have a clue about the g0y movement. they are specfically against anal sex. koki monk needs to leanr how to read before posting.
g0ys are not homophobic nor do they promote hate, what they promote and believe in is respect on a basic human level.
g0ys and many others in todays society realize that the gay community as a whole does more harm than good. They promote anal sex as the only form of sexual gratification between men when clearly hetero sexuals engage in it as well, they promote condom use to avoid HIV when logically they should be promoting the condemnation of the vector in which it is spread, i.e., anal sex.
The ASS is not a sexual organ and to treat it as such or to label it as such is a outright lie. It is a fetish, a fetish that 20-30 years ago was considered disgusting and revolting within the gay community. Unfortunately the gay oommunity and its supporters dont have one bit of a clue to same sex history. society has twisted and misconstrued same sex attractions into what it is known as today.
The Bible does not condemn same sex attractions, it condemns anal sex. A man can not lie with a man as he lies with a woman. It’s impossible UNLESS the man is stepping in as a substitute female and being penetrated and only way to do that is Anally. Religious rhetoric would like it to be a blanket statement against same sex attractions as if Jesus didn’t have a clue about our modern day issues. His statements/parables were timeless and applicable to each generation.. to say it isnt is to take away from the power of God and his Word and bring him down to mere mortal standards/abilities.
In Ancient Greek/Rome, it was punishable by death to be caught penetrating a man and using him as a substitute female. PHROT was the acceptable form in which men would be able to express their sexual lusts/attractions and tpyically this was done in a respectful fashion as majority of males had respect for their fellow man and would NEVER disrespect another man by trying to penetrate him anally. There is a reason why it is considered the male form of rape… frequent thou it was used as a control tool in defeated armys. The winning military group would rape the losing group in an effort to demoralize and control the war prisioners. Again, many gay people dont have a clue about their history or the history of same sex attractions.
Again biblically speaking, if “Homo” means same, and Adam says This is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” and marriage is an event in which two fleshs are made one, i.e, the same, i.e., “HOMO” and in Sodom and Gamoraha the cities were destroyed because the men wanted to have relations with the Angels “HETERO SARKOS”, i.e., defined as different flesh, then logically and clearly we can see that the terms Homo and Hetro are being used incorrectly and with hatred that is by God’s command sinful. To be Homo, i.e, the Same is what God’s plan was for. Likewise, when we are told that man will be a new creature in God, there is no male there is no female, we can be assured that God cares little to noe about gender therefore why should we?
The Answers are that Man in his limited ability to understand and his need to cloud and confuse, has taken something that originally was part of natural design, corrupted it per usual and then turns his back on it. Gay people have no idea nor does the heterosexual community that being same sex attracted is NOT a sin, ANAL “sex” is.
G0ys standfast to that belief and are willing to go toe to toe with anyone who wishes to prove them wrong. Thus far, goys: 1 Rest of the World: ZERO
g0ys arent going away, in fact their numbers have increased dramtically, justa sign that MEN are tired of others speaking for them, MEN want to be able to express themselves naturally and honestly without being or having the fear of being violated anally by other men who have no respect for others. The problem many people have with gays is not their same sex attractions but their want and need to anallly violate one another.
Be honest with yourselfs, things will become much more clearly when you do. ANAL sex is the problem, NOT same sex attractions but sadly most equate them to be one in the same and its not and g0ys are here to tell everyone. Get ready.
March 21st, 2007 at 1:11 am
It’s just another ideology that happens to center on homosexual relations. The idea of not having anal sex is great. The idea of creating an ideology around this is rediculous. Ideologies are the biggest barrier to reason and logic so creating a new dogmatism will just create more delusion.
You don’t need to create a new mythology or utilize radical propaganda tactics to tell the truth. This is what is most dissapointing about the whole g0y thing. They could’ve actually gone with reason and pursued the promotion of public health but instead missed the boat and just created a new cult.
The whole mythology about greek homosex is a myth. They made some interesting stories out of it but the idea that Greeks did not have anal sex or that it was shunned by most homo/bi-sexual males is simply a fairy tale. It certainly was a different culture where sexual relations were governed by status and age, but there were at the time (as there is now) differing and even contentious veiws about sexuality, one of which happened to be promoted by Plato. It’s better to look at history realistically rather than turn it into a fairy-tale for self-agrandizement.
Then there is the whole farce about gender. If the authors were serious about a realistic view of the subject they would look at the body of scientific evidence on the subject. Gender is frequently a term used to refer to cultural and social customs of a specific time and place that construe what behavior is masculine/ feminine or appropriate of men or women. To an extent much of this is socially constructed. However there is also the category of sex - male/female - and sex characteristics. It turns out that while men and women as a whole or on average share different sex characteristics, there is variation of sex characteristics accross the spectrum from male-typical to female-typical and this is in reference to specifically the biological expression of sex differentiation rather than learned cultural behavior. These sex characteristics are also blended into the terms masculine and feminine creating a delima as to the ambiguity of what is actually cultural/social and what is actually biological in terms of masculinity/femininity.
The gOy and frot definitions not only ignore sex variation they actually condemn it, and in doing so paint a broad brush where intersexed and androgenous individuals are labeled as disgusting. This is completely unneccesary and unrelated to public health concerns. In fact it probably just breeds new socially engineered neuroticisms. At the same time they express all femininity as inferior and in so doing deride women and simply reinforce radical chauvinism.
The main thing to keep in mind is that the propaganda involved is not about gaining a reasoned argument, it is about creating a new dogmatism. With that in mind, any true followers will enevitably rejact all reasoned criticism so it is futile to argue against any individual follower. On the other hand it is always helpful to provide an explicit critique of polarizing ideologies.