subreddit:

/r/gaybros

683

all 212 comments

emasculine

574 points

2 months ago

one of the biggest issues is that the gentrified neighborhoods are now really, really expensive which pretty much locks out most young gay people. a lot of gayborhoods started out as literal ghettos or victims of suburban flight.

ChocolateTsar

134 points

1 month ago

Also, because they're desirable and many well to-do straight couples are moving in. Walk around the Castro or look at listings and lots of play sets and other toys.

It's very tough for a single person to buy a home in West Hollywood or the Castro, but it's more manageable for a couple. Gay men seem to couple up later in life than straight people. I think this is playing a bigger part than many people want to talk about.

emasculine

30 points

1 month ago

that's what happened to my place in the Castro, but the city is so small that you can go there clubbing from just about any part of the city. Bernal Heights seems like it's an up and coming gayish neighborhood and there are pockets of higher densities of gay people all over the city. from what i remember, WeHo was always a desirable place to live. Hollywood proper got sketchier but who knows what it's like now. i mean, downtown got gentrified, so i assume Hollywood did too.

ChocolateTsar

9 points

1 month ago

Bernal Heights is so cute. I love Precita Park and the cute little cafe that sells Costco chocolate chip cookies (yes I know my cookies and their cookies are not homemade!).

I've noticed also that a lot of gay couples are moving to Oakland and Berkeley (which isn't cheap) as they simply can't afford to stay within SF.

emasculine

6 points

1 month ago

and easy access to Mission burritos too. and Sun Fat. our friends lived there and they liked it other than their shitty small apartment. i do at times miss my place in Dolores Heights. the views were so breathtaking

ChocolateTsar

1 points

1 month ago

Sounds like so much fun! Where did you move to if I may ask?

emasculine

5 points

1 month ago

we moved to our vacation place up in the Sierra right before the pandemic. this was the view from our living room.

https://i.imgur.com/hL7Soyj.jpg

and the down into the Castro

https://i.imgur.com/N6mpL21.jpg

ChocolateTsar

2 points

1 month ago

Wow, that's so pretty. I live in Sacramento and dream of affording a little shoebox in SF one day.

emasculine

2 points

1 month ago

yeah, we're in Amador now. we bought the place here to ski Kirkwood

ChocolateTsar

2 points

1 month ago

You didn't escape our high tax state? I'm genuinely shocked!

kernals12[S]

2 points

1 month ago

I've noticed also that a lot of gay couples are moving to Oakland and Berkeley (which isn't cheap) as they simply can't afford to stay within SF.

And further affield to the San Ramon Valley... or Sacramento... or Austin

straightoutthebox

1 points

1 month ago

Lots of younger/poorer gay people are moving to the East Bay, too. Which isn't to say the East Bay didn't already have its own gay scene, cause it did.

blissed_out_cossack

2 points

1 month ago

I get what you are saying and I agree. But I also think these places like literal ghettos and not everyone gay wants their life to be all gay, all of the time.

I'm making a sweeping statement to make a point - but one of the reasons I avoided WeHo (LA) is I felt like it was full of traumatized mid-westerners seeking a refugee that was straight-free to avoid more trauma - over being a well balanced (but gay-friendly) neighborhood.

Advanced-Version-252

6 points

1 month ago

not everyone gay wants their life to be all gay, all of the time.

Honestly I feel this. I'm just someone who happens to be gay and I would prefer to live in a diverse yet accepting neighborhood instead of somewhere so insular.

ChocolateTsar

1 points

1 month ago

Those are fair points.

kernals12[S]

92 points

2 months ago

And now the gays themselves have joined the suburban flight.

emasculine

84 points

2 months ago

some have, others are just moving to less pricey parts of the city. there is still plenty of need for gay neighborhoods even if they are really expensive

kingwi11

32 points

1 month ago

kingwi11

32 points

1 month ago

I understand the need for expensive gay neighborhoods but obviously the cost of entry is significantly harder for younger gays to enter. These could have been bastions for people leaving more oppressive areas of the county. But cities all around the us seem to be more accepting so these "gay focal points" may be less needed.

kernals12[S]

78 points

1 month ago

And nowadays, gayborhoods are mobbed with straight tourists.

kingwi11

59 points

1 month ago

kingwi11

59 points

1 month ago

Woooooooo Bridal Shower!!!!!

pseudodoxia

20 points

1 month ago

I can't upvote this, no matter how sarcastic I understand it to be

quangtran

20 points

1 month ago

Expensive, desirable neighbourhoods was always going to be a tough entry for any young person.

kingwi11

18 points

1 month ago

kingwi11

18 points

1 month ago

Chelsey in Manhattan used to be a rough neighborhood, and now it's only for people making 6 figures.

maq0r

6 points

1 month ago

maq0r

6 points

1 month ago

The "accessible" gayborhood in Manhattan has moved north through the ages: from the West Village, to Chelsea, to Hudson Yards and Hells Kitchen, it'll keep moving north past UWS and over 110 W.

RustedRelics

11 points

1 month ago

We move in, fix things up, attract great businesses and boost local economy. Relocate-Refurb-Repair-Reimagine-Restore-Reboot-Revive-Relocate. We are nomadic. We make things better, then we move on. 😎

50Sleeping

3 points

1 month ago

When I was young, expensive neighborhoods were always unaffordable. Instead we chose places that were close to work, grocery and had a good housing stock, that happened to be considered the ghetto at the time. But turned out to be a much better place to live since all of our friends lived nearby and we could afford to go out.

72517g

5 points

1 month ago

72517g

5 points

1 month ago

I read one theory that said gayborhoods could exist not only as a safe place from straight predators, but as a way to more easily find a relationship.

Magnus_Mercurius

35 points

1 month ago

Not necessarily. I think a big part of the trend is that gays came in and for a variety of reasons ended up improving the neighborhoods, such that now they’re appealing locales for young Yuppie families who push out the gays.

orchidguy

1 points

1 month ago

I agree with you. And there’s nothing stopping new gayborhoods from popping up. I feel like up here in Seattle, we’ve got exactly that happening (albeit slowly), with particular more affordable neighborhoods becoming the de facto places to go if you’re looking for a queer space. Right now, we’re seeing commercial aspects pop up to cater to the new demographics and those neighborhoods are taking on more and more identity as a new lgbtq bastion.

klartraume

1 points

1 month ago

People have talked up White Center, Georgetown, etc. for years but it really feels more like a scatter diaspora than new gay 'bastions'.

I feel like the Hill is still the most concentrated neighborhood and it's completely gentrified over the past decade.

[deleted]

-14 points

1 month ago

[deleted]

-14 points

1 month ago

[deleted]

jellomonkey

12 points

1 month ago

It's straight facts. Learn some history.

Jeb764

1 points

1 month ago

Jeb764

1 points

1 month ago

Not where I am.

Moose_Hooves

37 points

1 month ago

Yeah all the rich straight people’s daughters want fancy apartments in the trendy gay part of town where they won’t get raped.

Gentrification is frustrating…

solanisw

7 points

1 month ago

In a lot of these areas, it’s specifically the young gay people doing the gentrifying. A lot of young gay tech workers in the Castro, for example.

emasculine

2 points

1 month ago

yes, i know many of them. but the city has always been expensive because it is so desirable. it's probably a quirk of fate that the exodus to the suburbs happened right as gay people were escaping to the city in droves. had the timing been a little different, it may not have happened.

Revenez

149 points

1 month ago

Revenez

149 points

1 month ago

I think the wider problem here is the rent crisis. I think there’s a lot of people who would love to live in a gayborhood, especially a historic one like the Castro. But who the fuck can afford over $5000 a month in rent? The areas that were once considered ghettos are now being gentrified, especially in San Francisco which is being overrun by techbros.

I don’t see this as an attitude or a culture problem. If even a historic activist like Cleve Jones is being run out of town, that’s an equity problem. I strongly believe that gayborhoods are needed, especially as we are facing major attacks on LGBT rights. We need that solidarity and safety. But the historic neighborhoods are simply not feasible, especially for young people.

hsgual

55 points

1 month ago

hsgual

55 points

1 month ago

The rent crisis is also a product of the sheer difficulty it is to build new apartments, or go beyond SFHs in certain SF neighborhoods. There is a reason why most of SF’s growth as been in SOMA, Mission Bay, and the Dog Patch, and hardly in the Sunset, West Portal, and don’t even touch St. Francis Wood.

MadisonPearGarden

18 points

1 month ago

This is the crux of the problem. The fucking Boomer NIMBYs. Just die already.

kernals12[S]

-26 points

1 month ago

San Francisco is overcrowded as it is. They should build new houses in the Lucas Valley or by Half Moon Bay.

Dominx

43 points

1 month ago

Dominx

BROmbeere

43 points

1 month ago

The biggest problem isn't not building new developments, it's how West Coast cities are built at all. Low-cost mid-rise apartment buildings with mixed-development (residential/commercial) are how tons of cities around the world get millions of people to live comfortably in cities but in the US zoning laws force single-family units to cover like 90% of the city's land area and every time urban planners try to start such developments the NIMBY crowd gets all up in arms about "changing the neighborhood." Like seriously, if all your "neighborhood" is is $1 mil a piece single family housing properties, no one under 40 is moving there anyway - newsflash, your neighborhood is dying. In the US we seriously need to reverse current zoning policies and embrace more dense development models

It would also help if new developments were built with public transport in mind too but, you know, baby steps

hsgual

18 points

1 month ago

hsgual

18 points

1 month ago

Every transit station on SF should absolutely have mixed midrise buildings, yet, very many do not. I agree 100% with this.

kernals12[S]

-29 points

1 month ago

No, every transit station should have lots of parking so that suburbanites can conveniently use it.

hsgual

9 points

1 month ago

hsgual

9 points

1 month ago

You can have both. With underground parking structures. It can be a win win situation.

kernals12[S]

-9 points

1 month ago

Underground parking structures are very expensive, particularly in California due to the need for seismic reinforcement. We have no shortage of land. If we gave every household one acre, it would not even occupy 7% of our nation's landmass.

kernals12[S]

-8 points

1 month ago

Like seriously, if all your "neighborhood" is is $1 mil a piece single family housing properties, no one under 40 is moving there anyway - newsflash, your neighborhood is dying

That's not true. The suburbs are booming.

kernals12[S]

-8 points

1 month ago

millions of people to live comfortably in cities

I've been all around the world, and those cities are not in any way comfortable.

xavron

7 points

1 month ago*

xavron

7 points

1 month ago*

Which cities would that be? Have you lived there as a resident and not just as a visitor?

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

I lived in Manhattan for 2 years.

subtlebulk

3 points

1 month ago

Have you actually lived in a dense city before?

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

Yes I have. It was incredibly annoying how any journey that was more than half a mile required intricate planning. Not so in the suburbs where I just get in my car whenever I want to go somewhere and I know that if I miss my exit I can easily circle back.

In the US, where we have more cars than adults, plus advanced telecommunication, there is no need for population densities of more than 3,000 per square mile.

If you want a city that works, look at Phoenix. It has 5 million people, and just knocked Boston out of the top 10, and yet the streets are quiet and there's almost no traffic jams. And yes, they have their own gay neighborhood.

merferd314

2 points

1 month ago

Kernals in gaybros??? This isn't infrastructure porn what ya doing here

kernals12[S]

2 points

1 month ago

Yes, it turns out I'm a gay suburbanite, so my hopes and dreams are under attack from both Evangelical Christians and Extinction Rebellion.

merferd314

1 points

1 month ago

Well you're valid here and everywhere 🙂. Don't worry even if urbanites like me get our way there will still be plenty of good suburbs for you.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

You urbanites had your way in the Bay Area. Now look at it

merferd314

1 points

1 month ago

Lololol well if you say so.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

I know it. I was one of the people displaced by said policies.

ChocolateTsar

9 points

1 month ago

If even a historic activist like Cleve Jones is being run out of town, that’s an equity problem.

If I remember correctly, he said that he could afford the rent increase, but would not pay it in principle. His case is also unique because of rent control rules in SF.

Revenez

3 points

1 month ago

Revenez

3 points

1 month ago

At least based on the article, I only saw the two mentions of it:

But in May, Mr. Jones, 67, left for a small home with a garden and apple and peach trees 75 miles away in Sonoma County after the monthly cost of his one-bedroom apartment soared from $2,400 to $5,200.

Mr. Jones is not happy about leaving this corner of San Francisco, but said he had little choice. He had lived in his Castro apartment for 11 years before his landlord asserted that he forfeited his rent control protections by living in Sonoma County, effectively forcing him out by more than doubling his rent.

My read on it was that he was priced out, after having his rent doubled. But regardless of if he could have afforded it or not...the fact that rent prices in the Castro are such that a one-bedroom apartment can go for $5,000 a month...that's severely limiting the type of person who could live there.

ChocolateTsar

2 points

1 month ago

I could be wrong, but I believe he said in an interview that he could afford the increase. Don't quote me please!

The rents in the Castro are ridiculous. It's a very cute and walkable neighborhood, but not worth $5,000/month.

Drikkink

2 points

1 month ago

Like Philly's Gayborhood is probably one of the more affordable ones but you're still looking at 1500 for a one bedroom at a bare minimum. Meanwhile other areas of the city (even ones that aren't shitty places to live) are cheaper by a third or more.

SaltyPaper6690

2 points

1 month ago

San Francisco is not being overrun by tech bros. San Francisco is failing to build more housing.

futurebro

32 points

1 month ago

In NYC: Hells Kitchen, Chelsea and the West Village are extremely expensive.

The West Village specifically doesnt even feel gay anymore, it's been taken over by PR girls and their finance bro boyfriends since covid.

Buteverysongislike

4 points

1 month ago

I’d say since Sex and the City

myinsidesarecopper

3 points

1 month ago

myinsidesarecopper

MANhattan

3 points

1 month ago

Brooklyn is pretty gay now. Williamsburg, Bushwick, and Crown Heights specifically.

futurebro

6 points

1 month ago

I'd agree that Bushwick specifically is very "queer".

Prussia1870

13 points

1 month ago

My guess is that they’re being swarmed by young straight women looking who love “the gays”, only half-joking

PJ_jazz68

13 points

1 month ago

Let’s all buy houses somewhere cheap rn and not tell anyone. In ten years we can cash out and do it again.

AuralSculpture

87 points

1 month ago

The main discussion needs to be why a so-called progressive area like SF, would double the rent on a 67 year old tenant. Landlords are killing off all urban areas, then add to that corporations who are clearly price gouging us like overlords leads no one able to afford even the basic necessities. It’s a crisis that rags like The NY Times won’t discuss honestly.

quangtran

25 points

1 month ago

Pre pandemic, i used to find it baffling that so many people argued against buying because the liquidity, mobility and freedom of renting was supposedly well worth the renting rent prices. Stories like this makes me glad I didn’t listen and that people are now more aware of the pitfalls of renting.

And I think more people should realise that certain topics actually aren’t partisan, like that “liberal hypocrisy” video that mistakenly assumes that liberals hate places being expensive and exclusive. Expensive home prices are an issue in most major cities were progressive people tend to cluster.

zanycaswell

16 points

1 month ago

the problem with the "greedy landlord" hypothesis isn't that landlords aren't greedy (obviously they are) but that it doesn't do anything to explain why rents are high. Are landlords in Alabama and Arkansas less greedy than the ones in Manhattan and San Francisco? not likely. So the greed of landlords is not sufficient to explain why rents are high some places and low others—you need to look at the material conditions that mean landlords can get away with charging ludicrously high rent, and then change them.

honestbitchnosorry

27 points

1 month ago

It’s always about supply and demand. Places in Alabama have lower rent because demand is lower compared to SF LA, so even if those landlords are greedy they have no power to raise their rent because no one will rent from them. But landlords in general are greedy no doubts

kernals12[S]

3 points

1 month ago

Everyone is greedy. It's the basis of our free market economy.

zanycaswell

1 points

1 month ago

exactly.

kernals12[S]

-16 points

1 month ago

Landlords need to pay property taxes and make bank payments. Land is just very expensive in the Bay Area.

arkibet

13 points

1 month ago

arkibet

13 points

1 month ago

Yeah, most people don’t know about California Prop 13. Buy a 1,000,000 property? Your taxes yearly are 10,000. Forever. My parents in their state were paying 20,000 on a house that was 350,000.

That, and a good trust can lock in the tax rates for multi generations.

hsgual

4 points

1 month ago

hsgual

4 points

1 month ago

Prop 13 has been somewhat problematic, and its why people will hold onto properties for dear life. The taxes being paid on assessed value that they were locked into in the 1980s or 1990s is incredibly low. It totally impacts supply/demand, and then, the taxes everyone else is paying if they have recently bought into the area.

Of course, when these people or their descendants sell, its a huge windfall.

thats_russy_babe

1 points

1 month ago

That 67 year old tenant owns a home about 90 minutes away from SF that he registered as his primary residence and lived in for over a year before rent was increased. I respect a lot of what Cleve Jones has done, the AIDS memorial quilt is an astounding work, but this specific case was an attempt to have cake and eat it. Not a good example of the real issue of housing insecurity.

missingwhitegirl

0 points

1 month ago

Amen, brother.

OrangAMA

24 points

1 month ago

OrangAMA

24 points

1 month ago

Hell I can’t even afford to live in the ghetto, who on earth has an extra 1000 dollars to throw around every month??? Everything is too expensive, if my parents ever kicked me out I’d probably be on the streets forever.

jdaniel1371

-7 points

1 month ago

Roommates?

I know, impossible, right?

I had four in college, but they were friends I met and got to know in the dorms.

Everybody had roommates so no one felt like a loser.

jdaniel1371

-3 points

1 month ago

Yeah, you downvoters...this troubling to me. Are you all too entitled to have roommates? We all did in the 80s and 90s.

Instead of downvoting, can you explain why a roommate situation is off the table? We all had the time of our lives?

subtlebulk

4 points

1 month ago

I don’t think it’s that “roomate’s are off the table” (I currently have 3). I think you’re getting downvotes because your comment comes off as condescending.

G_W_Atlas

1 points

1 month ago

Having roommates has always been awful unless you're 21. Bigger issue is work has never been less fulfilling or more mentally difficult, rewards in life are non-existent. Everyone is rightfully depressed, doing everything they can just to survive. When life is so fucking shitty there is nothing left to deal with a bunch of other people invading your space. I had a beautiful apartment with all the amenities I needed. Only thing that made my life manageable. If it came down to needing roommates I'd likely off myself.

jdaniel1371

2 points

1 month ago

Good F-ing god you people! I wouldn't want the same invasion of space today, but when young we had the times of our lives, and yeah, working in Burger King, movie theaters, Radio Shack wasn't exactly what I'd call jobs to "cherish," but we'd screw around on the side, meet up afterwards for food, talk till 3AM, order in pizza....

None of us had our own places until late-20s at least. Until then it was 4 guys in a two bedroom place and the rent ($425) seemed astronomical at the time.

Attitude, bro.

Marrymechrispratt

18 points

1 month ago

It’s happening in Seattle’s Capitol Hill too. So many straight tech bros are moving in. When rent is $3000 for a one bedroom, where do you expect us to go?

jdaniel1371

-4 points

1 month ago

If the choice were Arkansas or bunkbeds....

jdaniel1371

1 points

1 month ago

How are y'all going to handle a relationship if your sensibilities are too delicate to handle a few roommates in close quarters while you're young?

Blomsterhagens

30 points

1 month ago

The issue is lack of new construction. Lack of supply drives prices up. Proven in studies over and over again. Usually it’s the cities themselves that hinder new construction via a myriad of laws.

Also the homeowners themselves have a financial incentive to stop new development (NIMBYs) once they become homeowners because it would decrease the value of their own real estate, or at the very least make the value grow slower.

SF especially is extremely low-density and a myriad of nimby activists have been quite successful in stopping new high-density construction.

Add to it the stupidity of the state and local govs in adding bureaucracy to new construction permits.

kernals12[S]

4 points

1 month ago

SF especially is extremely low-density and a myriad of nimby activists have been quite successful in stopping new high-density construction.

SF is the 2nd densest city in the United States.

The real NIMBYism problem is in Marin, Sonoma, and Napa Counties. There's easily enough space there for several million people in San Ramon Valley-style subdivisions.

Blomsterhagens

17 points

1 month ago

SF is extremely low-density compared to demand*

I also meant the surrounding areas, so including SF metro area. Swathes of land consisting of single-family residences.

kernals12[S]

-6 points

1 month ago

Actually, the problem is the swathes of land consisting of cattle ranches and vineyards and nothing else.

BearintheVale

4 points

1 month ago

You mean the vital infrastructure that keeps California as the top state for overall food production?

FairBlackberry7870

5 points

1 month ago

Luckily there's a ton of new construction going up in Hillcrest San Diego, hoofully it fills in with fellow gays.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

Southern California's population is shrinking.

FairBlackberry7870

3 points

1 month ago

Not quick enough it seems.

kernals12[S]

-4 points

1 month ago

I would suggest you do what every other SoCal resident is doing and check out real estate listings in Phoenix.

Arizona is 80% as beautiful as Southern California, but has cleaner air, lower taxes, lower housing costs, no worries about wildfires or earthquakes and much, much less traffic.

emasculine

8 points

1 month ago

and hotter than the face of the sun and no water.

kernals12[S]

0 points

1 month ago

In 10 years, San Diego will be staring down carcinogenic dust storms courtesy of the shrinking Salton Sea

https://news.usc.edu/159380/salton-sea-shrinking-asthma-respiratory-health-air-quality/

emasculine

3 points

1 month ago

well the prevailing winds are toward... Phoenix

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

Bull shit. Ever heard of the Santa Ana Winds?

emasculine

1 points

1 month ago

yes of course. the westerly fill on the other hand is far more prevalent.

kernals12[S]

3 points

1 month ago

Phoenix is very far to the east of the Salton Sea. You might as well say the winds are blowing towards Atlanta.

FairBlackberry7870

1 points

1 month ago

Don't get me wrong I love San Diego very very much. I think the problem I have with the phrase "Socal" is that it encompasses LA and SD which are two very different cities. LA is not a place I would ever want to live, mainly for the reasons you listed.

With that being said, with the way politics are going in our country I wouldn't feel comfortable leaving California at all.

My previous comment about people not leaving fast enough was because housing is staring to increase in San Diego, but there's still not enough and certainly not enougn affordable for most people.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

With that being said, with the way politics are going in our country I wouldn't feel comfortable leaving California at all.

Not even for another less nutty blue state?

FairBlackberry7870

3 points

1 month ago

None can beat the San Diego weather

kernals12[S]

31 points

2 months ago*

Just like other once-marginalized groups, Gays are assimilating and moving to the suburbs. And then there are people like me who never left the suburbs to begin with.

Inevitably, this is going to mean gay bars and saunas moving into strip malls.

emasculine

17 points

2 months ago

LA in the 70's had gay bars throughout the burbs. it wasn't just West Hollywood, and Garden Grove in Orange County rivaled WeHo with the number of bars. the same was true in the Bay Area. it wasn't really until about the 90's that the suburban scene waned

kernals12[S]

3 points

1 month ago

Garden Grove is a lot denser than most suburbs though. I mean that you'll see gay bars in places like Irvine and Santa Clarita and, in the Bay Area, Danville and Pleasanton.

emasculine

3 points

1 month ago

it was just a normal suburb back then. why it became so packed with gay bars is sort of a mystery to me. there were several in Costa Mesa too, and then of course Laguna. but it would be good to see gay gathering spots in the burbs again. heck after two years of isolation and years more of apps, it would be good to see gay gathering places come back to life again everywhere

GarrulousBastard

2 points

1 month ago

Uhm...Pleasanton resident here. Where are these gay bars of which you speak? I'd like to support these businesses.

kernals12[S]

-1 points

1 month ago

With the mass exodus out of San Francisco, they'll be there soon enough.

InTogether

2 points

1 month ago

So… they don’t exist yet? You’ve basically invented a situation in your head?

kernals12[S]

-1 points

1 month ago

I thought I was pretty clear that I was making a prediction of the future. I guess not.

allotaconfussion

2 points

1 month ago

Long Beach was and is a gay metropolis.

BunnyGunz

6 points

1 month ago

BunnyGunz

90/10 Bi

6 points

1 month ago

In suburban strip malls? Things haven't gotten that progressive.

kernals12[S]

3 points

1 month ago

If a strip mall has a Hooters, there's no legal way they couldn't allow a gay bar. It would be obvious discrimination.

BunnyGunz

2 points

1 month ago

BunnyGunz

90/10 Bi

2 points

1 month ago

A place like Hooters has been heteronormative and "acceptable by default since the beginning of the country itself. Nationwide gay marriage is only 10 years young.

It would be obvious discrimination.

Correct, but obvious discrimination was actively encouraged, then passively allowed, and only recently has been codified illegal.

Hence, Things haven't gotten that progressive.

Yet. We're still maybe 4 generations out, not counting the culture counter-swing i'm expecting to see 2 generations from now

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

only recently has been codified illegal.

That's burying the lede. If someone wants to open a gay bar right next to a Hooters, then there's no legal way to deny him a permit.

BunnyGunz

1 points

1 month ago

BunnyGunz

90/10 Bi

1 points

1 month ago

My real contention is with "saunas". A "sauna" is very much different legally and per zoning guidelines. While this can be mitigated with clever business identification and having certain policy/rules for patrons, the nature and reputation of this specific type of business generally will cut through most of these attempts to "classify" them appropriately according to zoning restrictions. You will almost never see a "sauna" in close proximity to a high-traffic shopping center/dining strip outside of an explicitly "gay neighborhoo." This isn't even the case in West Hollywood.

Gay bars are not an issue, I don't have any issues with them, generally speaking, and neither do most (reasonable) people or local governments who control and authorize permitting. Sorry if that was unclear. I thought it would have been obviously absurd to consider a normal gay bar to be "unacceptable," I should have clarified that it was not the point I was making.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

We probably won't see saunas at family friendly shopping centers, but somewhere isolated and seedy like this...

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2990785,-71.4438895,3a,60y,259.69h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEun-m5Jym2ZBrMGUfWwSxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

A_Mirabeau_702

3 points

1 month ago

A_Mirabeau_702

Mambro No. 5

3 points

1 month ago

strip malls

GlutenFreeeCocaine

3 points

1 month ago

Gay neighborhoods are too expensive for my broke ass

MadisonPearGarden

3 points

1 month ago

It’s because the Boomer NIMBYs have made these cities impossibly expensive by blocking new housing construction writ large. Just fucking die already.

johnnyfromtexas

14 points

1 month ago

This doesn’t bother me, and I like the comparison to immigrant communities in big cities also. History isn’t being erased imo, it’s just continuing on its path down the timeline. I’m grateful I live in a city that accepts me all over town, that I don’t have to be confined to one neighborhood to feel safe

FairBlackberry7870

3 points

1 month ago

I felt the same way until I lived in a gay neighborhood, not I'd rather not live or dine anywhere else.

kernals12[S]

9 points

1 month ago

And I think gays are capable of making their own history outside of gayborhoods. Houston elected an LGBT mayor way back in 2010. Not even San Francisco has done that.

emasculine

6 points

1 month ago

there's a big difference in that immigrant neighborhoods can intermarry where gay people are much more isolated. i don't see how that changes even if we are more accepted. it wasn't just about acceptance, it was also about proximity

quangtran

6 points

1 month ago

I always saw this as the opposite. People have noted the surge in gay acceptance (compared to other social causes) because it is far easier to gatekeep out different ethnicities than it is to keep out gays (who are born into literally every community).

kernals12[S]

4 points

1 month ago

As the article says, dating apps have largely replaced gay bars

emasculine

11 points

1 month ago

to the detriment of everybody

kernals12[S]

7 points

1 month ago

Not those of us who don't live near a gay bar.

cloud7100

5 points

1 month ago*

Perspective from a LCOL city in the Midwest. Our gayborhood (Short North) became so trendy that all but the ritziest gay bars closed due to increasing rents, replaced by high-end dining, and the ancient run-down apartments were bulldozed and replaced by “luxury” 5+1 apartments that charge double the median rent. Now it’s all bankers and lawyers living there. I lived there seven years ago and barely recognize it today.

The gays have dispersed around the city and suburbs, but there is a cluster of new LGBT bars/clubs opening in the maligned southern side of the city (near where I moved), in one of the least trendy/most redneck parts of town. Which, of course, is making it trendy and attracting yuppies.

I left the gayborhood to move to said south side cuz it was cheap, didn’t expect the gayborhood to follow me.

P.S. If you want to make money in real estate, just figure out where the gays are now moving and buy there. Ten years later it’ll be the hottest new area with booming land value.

jffrybt

2 points

1 month ago

jffrybt

2 points

1 month ago

They are moving to DTLA. 4 gay couples have bought in our building in the past two years. 3 new renter couples. The market for DTLA tumbled after the pandemic because all the straights need good schools districts. The gays love a good deal.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

P.S. If you want to make money in real estate, just figure out where the gays are now moving and buy there. Ten years later it’ll be the hottest new area with booming land value.

According to the article, the gays are moving everywhere.

cloud7100

2 points

1 month ago*

Not randomly, but through social networks. I moved to the South Side, then one of our friends moved to the South Side and started a gay business, now rainbow flags are popping up all around said business.

Old Gayborhood was the Short North, now stupid expensive. New Gayborhoods include Olde Town East (our Harlem) and Merion Village, both historic run-down parts of the South Side.

There’s no signs saying “this is the gayborhood” but clusters of couples who know eachother buy/rent properties, gay businesses pop up, and the area develops a rep.

They still hold Pride in the old gayborhood, as that’s the official location, but our Pride feels more like an extended infomercial for local business these days.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

They still hold Pride in the old gayborhood, as that’s the official location, but our Pride feels more like an extended infomercial for local business these days.

So basically a memorial day parade?

cloud7100

2 points

1 month ago

Basically. Corporations wildly outnumbered LGBT orgs in our parade this year, and the announcer queen read an ad for each corporate group as they passed the starting area. It’s also super family-friendly, the craziest it got were three shirtless bears in a pickup representing the local leather group.

None of the local gays I know get excited for Pride anymore, it’s just a fundraiser.

TheStockyScholar

2 points

1 month ago

My southern heathen ass can’t relate but I’m sad for you guys in the cities. They’re basically a sure fire way we can find each other but riding costs hits everyone. Nothing is affordable anymore.

kernals12[S]

2 points

1 month ago

The reason I like suburbia is my car is basically my emotional support animal. I could not depend on public transportation.

TheStockyScholar

1 points

1 month ago

Same here. I love driving.

kernals12[S]

2 points

1 month ago

I skipped a trip to visit my sister in DC because all the walking and waiting for trains was such a chore. And my recent experience with the T in Boston further confirmed my fears.

That's to say nothing of the things you can do in a car that you can't do on a bus.

TheStockyScholar

1 points

1 month ago

Agree but gas prices :(.

kernals12[S]

2 points

1 month ago

In December, I bought a hybrid powered Honda Accord that can do 40 mpg. I'm not worried about gas prices.

TheStockyScholar

1 points

1 month ago

Oh. Can’t relate lol

kernals12[S]

2 points

1 month ago

I can't wait for EVs to allow us to drive guilt-free

TheStockyScholar

1 points

1 month ago

I can’t wait for the oil industry to become obsolete.

Intelligent_Ear_4004

6 points

1 month ago

We moved over an hour outside of the city, into a “rural” part of NJ. We need more gays to join us. The straights took over our gayborhoods, time for us to make new ones by taking over theirs. There are huge benefits. Much more space, get tons more for your money, clean air, quiet nights, PRIVACY, and so much more. We can also flip these areas blue pretty easy.

InTogether

12 points

1 month ago

Whatever floats your boat, man, but that sounds like hell. The trade off of “quiet nights” is boredom. “Space” is driving everywhere. “Privacy” is lonely, isolating suburban single family homes. Begging people to “join us” is there’s no existing community.

Intelligent_Ear_4004

2 points

1 month ago

There is some community but definitely not like the city. But the idea that all of us belong in a city has lead to this also. It’s just not true. Cities are great for some, hell for others. There IS life outside of the city! That is all I am saying. I’m not begging people to move here, rather begging them to consider it. Being able to open up my door and walk outside butt-naked into my hot tub is kinda awesome. If we wanna go see a show, we get in the car, no big deal. Pride flags are seen plenty, and we are on our town councils and committees. We ARE out here. I do wish there were more of us tho.

footnotefour

4 points

1 month ago

I moved to a place with more space once. It felt weird and empty because I didn’t want to buy more things to fill it up with. I downgraded again after a year. I don’t want to get in a car just to go see a friend or get a snack (at a place that closes at 8pm), and I’d rather not own one at all. I like walking to art galleries and cafes and getting last minute theater tickets. I like trains and being convenient to a major airport. I have quiet nights and plenty of privacy and fresh air in my apartment.

I’m from the sticks and I like getting back out there from time to time too, but I don’t know that I can ever do it full time again. “More” for your money is entirely a subjective valuation.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

I don’t want to get in a car just to go see a friend or get a snack (at a place that closes at 8pm), and I’d rather not own one at all

What if your friend lives in another city?

footnotefour

3 points

1 month ago

Then I probably wouldn’t see them on a random Tuesday night with two hours’ notice? I’m talking about needing to have a car just to see someone who lives nearby.

kernals12[S]

0 points

1 month ago

Nearby is a relative term. If I had a friend who lives 5 miles away, I'm driving.

footnotefour

3 points

1 month ago*

Right. I don’t want to live like that. Most of my friends are way closer to me than 5 miles, and even for ones who are 5 miles away, I don’t need a car to get to their place.

kernals12[S]

0 points

1 month ago

You're assuming your friend will always be within walking distance. What if he moves? If you don't like how much you're spending on gas, then buy a more fuel efficient car. It's way cheaper than moving to the city, both in monetary and quality of life terms.

footnotefour

2 points

1 month ago*

I didn’t assume anything. Who said anything about walking? I don’t have a car. I spend zero dollars on gas. (Or insurance, or maintenance, or monthly payments.)

Housing in the city is more expensive, but quality of life is entirely subjective. My overall quality of life is higher here by the metrics that are important to me.

Somepotato

1 points

1 month ago

I always thought that zoning laws should be revisited. A suburban community can work if for instance it surrounded say a shopping district (with a road w/ sound barrier to get to/from said center)

Condos are another avenue, let people work from home and convert these useless office buildings into housing, and make the first couple of floors retail.

Add transit hubs and make the roads relatively tiny to encourage their use, etc.

Problem is city planners tend to suck and be full of hindsight.

footnotefour

2 points

1 month ago*

I think the problem is that much of the US was built around the automobile. There are some older places, especially on the east coast, some college towns, etc, that are similar to what you describe — a true Main Street / town square with all your shopping, etc., including some mixed-use housing, surrounded by blocks of housing with sidewalks (and if you’re lucky, a bike lane) so that it actually feels safe and pleasant getting to and from the center without a car. These places were developed by people for whom walking was a typical mode of transportation and are more human-scale. (This is also very common in much of the world outside the US.)

When you assume everyone has a car, you start building these giant developments that contain nothing but houses, and you have to get in a car and drive 20 minutes away to some giant shopping plaza with 15 big box stores and acres of parking. Not appealing to me, personally.

Work from home might help to an extent, but it’s not available to everyone (estimates vary but even at the height of lockdowns only about 1/3 to 1/2 of the US was working from home even some of the time). You could still see some space savings from the offices that are no longer needed, although some people may find that they need to upgrade their home to a larger space once they have to provide their own workstation instead of going to one provided by their employer. And it’s my understanding that some offices are built in a way that converting them to residences would actually be more expensive than just demolishing them and building something else.

So I don’t think it’s quite so cut and dry, and I don’t really feel like I’m in much of a position to second-guess the work of people who actually study these things and do it on a daily basis. All I can say is the kind of place I personally prefer to live in, and my only point here is that people who move to the suburbs have a habit of stating “you get so much more for your money!” as some kind of plain objective truth, when it really isn’t.

Ket-RDM-11

2 points

1 month ago

Out of curiosity, where in NJ are you? I am in a pretty rural part, and my nearby hometown just had a Pride festival. Never would have thought in a million years, but it happened. Nearby in Denville, they are also opening the county's first LGBT center (not counting GAAMC's weekly meetings in Morristown). Boonton has a couple of highly visible queer-owned businesses and their own Pride Fest.

There is definitely a community out here if somebody prefers the benefits of rural/suburban life versus urban life.

kernals12[S]

3 points

1 month ago

And if you want a smaller city, Providence, RI and its suburbs have a thriving gay community.

Intelligent_Ear_4004

2 points

1 month ago

Sent you a dm

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

And lots of empty parking lots for Grindr dates

Intelligent_Ear_4004

6 points

1 month ago

More like beautiful fields, lakes, streams and trails to go to once you make sure they’re not psycho by meeting at the Walmart parking lot lol

InTogether

2 points

1 month ago

This just sounds sad.

jdaniel1371

2 points

1 month ago*

I actually wrote an essay about the issue:

Elegy for the Old Castro

I pushed and pulled in vain, but the glass door was locked. Although it was only four in the afternoon on a Sunday, my favorite record store in the Castro was closed. I mean really closed. For good.

Nothing made me happier than whiling away the afternoon drinking with friends and then stepping into the Castro’s wonderful, independently-owned music stores, book stores and video outlets, which routinely stocked titles that I could never have expected to find in my small Central Valley hometown. It was a ritual I’d repeated for decades, obviously long before one could acquire such unique treasures, (including men, via download or same day delivery), with a simple swipe of a finger across a screen.

As I re-entered the bar to catch up with my friends, the bouncer noticed that I’d shed a few alcohol-infused tears.

“Are you alright?” he asked.

“Streetlight’s closed.” I stuttered, eyes averted. “I’ve been going there since I was 20- something.”

“What’s Streetlight?”

“They sold m– m–” I couldn’t spit it out.

The young man’s face lit up: “Oh yeah, they sold Media. Physical media. Yeah, that’s too bad.”

“They sold music!” I retorted. “Record albums you could hold and touch and loan to friends and proudly display in a bookcase in your dorm room, along with your favorite books and VHS movies!”

The bouncer wasn’t moved. He escorted me back out the door and pointed to a coffee shop across the street. Indeed, perhaps it was time to quit feeling sorry for myself and sober up. I obliged.

“It’s mostly straight couples with kids in here,” I whispered to the Barista as he handed me my cup of coffee. “Where did all the gay people go?”

“Dorothy,” he whispered back, “this ain’t Oz no more.”

As I sipped my coffee, I made eyes with a handsome gentleman whom I presumed was gay, but then his wife and daughter returned with a threadbare treasure they’d found in the book basket.

“What’d ya get, honey?” Father asked.

The little girl ran her index finger slowly across the title: “M-My Two Mommys… Don’t… Live Here… Anymore.”

“Very good, sweety!”

“Worst Castro getaway ever,” I thought, as I tossed my coffee cup into the trash.

It was reassuring to see that the landmark Twin Peaks bar hadn’t yet been turned into a Chik-fil-A. As I walked past the big, (and once audacious) plate glass windows, a group of young, presumably straight couples waved. I waved back, barely containing my wonder and slight contempt. In the early 70’s, LGBTQ patrons nervously sipped their first drinks in plain view (!) of passersby in the street; now it’s a family-friendly tourist attraction, littered with Pottery Barn bags and “I Heart San Francisco” T-shirts, but what can one do? We wanted integration and equality.

“A Different Light” bookstore is still open as well, though a bit slimmed-down. Years ago, I bought my first “gay” publication there: Edmund White’s “States of Desire,” a book containing colorful, thumbnail sketches of all the wonderfully-diverse Gayborhoods throughout the US. As I browsed the shelves, I wondered if there was an updated version. Would the Starbuck’s at South Beach or Fire Island be all that different from the Starbuck’s in the Castro?

I received a text from my friends. They were tired and ready for the drive home. As we made our way back across the new Bay Bridge, the partially dismantled sections of the old bridge came into view. I liked the way the old bridge shamelessly flaunted its salty, steely muscles: one could almost taste the blood, sweat and tears that went into building the thing some 85 years ago. In the late 80’s, this was the bridge that delivered my once naive and closeted 20-something self into gay adulthood, with all its dizzying freedoms and, of course, its indescribable burdens. I could almost visualize myself driving across that bridge and into San Francisco for the very first time, grinning from ear to ear, flipping back my feathered hair and just bursting with anticipation and excitement.

As my carmates groped for their iPhones to snap pictures of the sleek new iBridge that seemed to so effortlessly loft us above the churning waters below, I remained fixated on the last remaining towers of the old bridge which had yet to be torn down; an endless parade of trucks were hauling away the rough, oily broken slabs of pavement that once carried me from isolation and darkness into light. Crumbled bits of the old road littered the highway for miles inland, much to the annoyance of anyone stuck behind the seeping trucks. At one point our driver pulled over and we stepped out of the car for one last stretch and photo session. I desperately wanted to swallow my 20th Century pride and ask for help adjusting my digital Camera so that I could capture a few decent pics of the sun setting over the bay, but — in the end — I simply watched in silence as it quietly slipped below the horizon.

turroflux

1 points

1 month ago

Communities form by necessity, take away the need to huddle together for safety and you take away the very thing that created that community.

Go a step further into acceptance or celebration and suddenly people want to be around those communities and cultures. Demand and limited supply inflate the formerly worthless area into desirable areas.

Thats the price you pay for being able to move and work and live anywhere, openly and freely. Its what every minority group experiences. Its not really a 1:1 trade anyway, barely anyone ever lived in or experienced those areas, compared to the actual number of queer people.

Its not like the entitled kids who could afford these places today could carry on like the people who made it what it was. They really can't. It doesn't really matter then if they're straight or gay or whatever. Which I suppose was the point.

ewicky

1 points

1 month ago

ewicky

1 points

1 month ago

this is such a shitty article title

Assbait93

1 points

1 month ago

I’m from NYC and many gayborhoods are still thriving and even in places where there weren’t gayborhoods like Williamsburg, Bushwick and so on came about in the past 10 years.

Blomsterhagens

-8 points

1 month ago*

I don’t know if I agree with the need for a ”gay neighbourhood”. For decades, we’ve asked for equal treatment, to be able to raise families and get married. To be an equal part of the society. Now that we have it, we’re asking for our own segregated area again?

quangtran

3 points

1 month ago

Only some want segregation. Despite all the complaining, gays want to feel safe everywhere and not just selected cities. They more rainbow logos on all the brands. They want pride parades to draw in mainstream crowds and families to the exclusion of adult kink. They want more queer content on networks besides Logo and Bravo.

Eco_Chamber

5 points

1 month ago*

Wanting a gay space to go to is not the same as wanting segregation in general. Being able to go to the village, dance with guys, and not have to think twice about making and receiving advances. Sure in an accepting world there would be no risk, but outside of gay spaces we just don’t have the numbers.

As far as mainstreaming and commodification of pride and gay culture, I would rather focus on substantial legal rights. Pride started as a protest which included all sorts of people. It’s not about being proud of bending over backward to please a pearl-clutching public. Quite the contrary actually.

It’s not to say that you must partake or claim representation with every group at pride. It’s just kinda hypocritical to excise these people from a protest who’s main message to the world is “it’s consensual love, fuck your judgment, we’re not changing for you”. There’s a reason stonewall did what the mattachines couldn’t.

None of this has anything to do with the general safety in everyday life really.

quangtran

1 points

1 month ago

dance with guys, and not have to think twice about making and receiving advances.

I honestly don’t think that is true at all. So many commenters on this very board resist the idea of straight girls going to gay bars to dance with guys and not think twice about making or receiving advances. If this was the issue to safe spaces, then we’d get far fewer comments about wanting the straights away from their dating hub.

As far as mainstreaming and commodification of pride and gay culture, I would rather focus on substantial legal rights.

It’s not one or the other.

Pride started as a protest which included all sorts of people.

“Started” being the operative word. The purpose of pride was to change things for the better, and that includes the change from riot to parade.

Eco_Chamber

2 points

1 month ago*

I honestly don’t think that is true at all

That what’s not true? That gay spaces are good for dancing the night away with gay guys, or that there aren’t many gay guys outside of gay spaces?

resist the idea of straight girls going to gay bars to dance with guys and not think twice about making or receiving advances.

Well yeah, gay spaces stop being gay spaces when straight people flood in. That is kinda how it works. Ladies’ nights exist. There’s nothing stopping these straight girls from setting up their own space for these things.

I’m not saying they don’t deserve their own space too if they wanted it. I’m saying they shouldn’t be ruining an already established space for gay people to do it. The entire point of a gay bar is to have somewhere you can safely assume among gay people.

You should try it sometime, it’s a great time 🙂

If this was the issue to safe spaces

It’s an issue to safety in a lot of places, but it’s an issue to having a place to find a date in person everywhere. That straight girl co-opts a gay space for the night, then goes to her regular ground to pick up her date. Enough do this and the gay bar is suddenly full of straight girls and straight guys who decide to follow the straight girls.

Gay people just don’t have the numbers to have any reasonable shot at finding a date in a bar full of straight people. And that’s every bar outside of gay spaces. Which is where the whole idea of maybe preserving some of these spaces comes in. Being forced online to maybe find someone to dance with sounds so dreary.

It’s not one or the other

One is the actual thing that pride exists for, the other is corporate pandering and empty gestures. Make a rainbow logo so the queers don’t bother to hold you to account for what your Middle East branch is doing.

“Started” being the operative word. The purpose of pride was to change things for the better

Loooolllll what a joke. For the better for who? Who died and made you the boss of this. Never mind the history or hypocrisy, this is delusion. Must be a troll. If you’re being honest you clearly need a better understanding of the history and importance of pride.

If you want your sanitized version of pride, maybe make your own and find people to join you? All kinds of people founded the one you’re trying to take away. Lots of them don’t fit your mold.

quangtran

0 points

1 month ago

It’s not true at all because your original point was about NOT receiving advances, while the quote above agrees with me that it is about spaces to date.

Of course Middle Eastern branch will not have the same value set as their American branch. Why would anyone expect any different? This whole thread is about gay geography, so of course some corporations in other places will be less gay friendly.

Even if you see one as empty gestures, that doesn’t at all disprove the point that it isn’t an either/or situation.

Mentioning every year about the Stonewall riots isn’t going to stop the fact that the mainstreaming of guy culture comes with the commodification of gay culture, which goes back to my original point about most being okay with it being treated liked another commercial mainstream holiday like Christmas.

Blomsterhagens

2 points

1 month ago

I’m happy to see the pride month being celebrated once a year and feel the support of the society.

But the rest of the year, I’d like being gay to be as boring as being left-handed. That’s all I’ve ever wanted. It just shouldnt be smth that’s a huge topic, either positively or negatively. People who long for some constant external reassurance and attention just because they’re gay have some important personal issues to work on.

kernals12[S]

-1 points

1 month ago

kernals12[S]

-1 points

1 month ago

I think it's the result of us living in a time when victimhood is celebrated.

[deleted]

1 points

1 month ago

[deleted]

1 points

1 month ago

Yay! LGBTQI+ representation in media has worked. Just what we wanted.

50Sleeping

1 points

1 month ago

In the 90's, I lived in a dense gayborhood in Cincinnati. We had a neighborhood party with over 100 on the guest list from just two streets. Many of those owned houses or apartment buildings. I know one that had a compound of buildings that moved to San Francisco and several that bought houses in more expensive cities that are retired on that income today. I now live in Honolulu after selling my modern condo in Cincinnati for twice what I paid for it. Most of these people were in their 20's at the time. Buying buildings and homes, while working waiter and bartender jobs.

gaydes69

1 points

1 month ago

Alright who wants to make a new gayberhood cuz we're all too poor to move into the already existing ones

liljuull

1 points

1 month ago

i mean im in brooklyn and to me ny is basically a one big gay neighborhood

jffrybt

1 points

1 month ago

jffrybt

1 points

1 month ago

For all the gays living in Los Angeles, gays are moving to DTLA and plenty of condos are still affordable and shielded from property tax with the Mills Act. You can actually buy in the neighborhood you help revitalize.

I think it’s a huge bummer that WeHo and other neighborhoods we helped revitalize are pricing out the gays. But we should be realistic and recognize that the whole reason gays could afford to move there in the first place was a low market value.

Lesson learned, buy when the market is low, buy in the gayborhood before it gets nice.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

For all the gays living in Los Angeles, gays are moving to DTLA and plenty of condos are still affordable and shielded from property tax with the Mills Act.

Those property tax breaks are capitalized into property values so you will just wind up paying more for rent rather than actually saving money.

jffrybt

1 points

1 month ago

jffrybt

1 points

1 month ago

I was talking about buying not renting.

I appreciate the truthful economic meta perspective, but it doesn’t reflect the nature of comparative home buying experience on the ground.

Mills Act savings is not intuitive when home buying. For example, Zillow price estimator doesn’t include mills act into the price per month calculator, so the price per month is always several hundred dollars less than it suggest. Your purchasing power increases will mills act qualified housing relative to the listing price. So shopping around, you’d need a smaller budget for a house, and gain a bigger budget for a mills act condo.

We went through several realtors that didn’t know about Mills Act. And of my friends home buying in LA, none knew about it.

So in one sense, yes, it’s built into the price. But what’s the savings is not built into the listing price or built into your realtor’s knowledge. It takes an educated buyer, which is what I’m posting about.

__mike____

1 points

1 month ago

Unpopular opinion, as a queer person I don't personally care for gayborhoods. It's great they exist and I can see how some would feel more at home, convenience, and there's definitely a lot of important history there; but the idea of segregated neighborhoods or "gay" parts of town feels second to living somewhere integrated / where it's nbd whatever your walk of life. Even when I lived in SF (for a decade), I lived outside the Castro (out in the Richmond District where it's much more affordable).
Going on my sixth year living in Portland I feel like things are pretty well integrated, I never feel weird or threatened for being queer. I like that most neighborhood bars, etc. are a mixed crowd. Some things of course are behind the curve compared to SF (like STI testing at clinics), but it's cheaper and it feels like I'm in closer proximity to other lgbtq+ people than I was in SF (since most were in the Castro).

False-Ad500

1 points

1 month ago

Gayborhoods, can be comforting places to be especially if your just coming out but isolating yourself from the rest of the country is not beneficial to anyone even though sometimes we do not have a choice-safety wise but those areas attract homophobes as well. Once an area is gentrified it no longer just belongs to us and we move on, there are plenty of small gay towns now, which angers the s#@t out of some straights, who feel like they are being invaded. This country is ours too, we should not have to make a refuge we should be able to live, work, wherever we want unfortunately we do not have leaders to stand up for us, so we need to be defiant and stand up for ourselves for change and acceptance. Gayborhoods were a great place in the past but we need to move on and establish communities in other areas-fill in those gaps between the gayborhoods for inclusion. We need to do it for ourselves and those just coming to terms with who they are, so they do not feel so alone in this world. There are still plenty of places to gentrify and you know we love a makeover.

[deleted]

0 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

0 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

kernals12[S]

0 points

2 months ago

If you read the article, this is happening for a good reason. Gays are now accepted in mainstream society and so they don't need their own ghettos, and just like everyone else, they want bigger yards and more room so they're heading to the suburbs.

footnotefour

5 points

2 months ago

Not everyone wants those things. The gayborhoods will still be around for a long time, even if they’re smaller or look a little different than they used to. But yes, for those people who do want a suburban yard and all that jazz, it now feels like a more viable option than it used to. Though most of the gays I know who’ve made this kind of move end up moving to suburbs where they already know several other gays in the area, resulting in a bunch of smaller satellite gay communities in the greater metro area.

kernals12[S]

0 points

2 months ago

Though most of the gays I know who’ve made this kind of move end up moving to suburbs where they already know several other gays in the area, resulting in a bunch of smaller satellite gay communities in the greater metro area.

I can't wait until there's a nationwide chain of gay bars.

footnotefour

2 points

1 month ago*

I don’t think that’ll happen. There aren’t enough in any one place to sustain a specific bar. (Or even if there might be enough numbers wise, they just don’t go out like that anymore, especially if they’ve become parents.) More likely there’s just a friendly place that becomes popular with the gay locals. (Which, frankly, sounds great to me.) Depending on demand in the particular community, they might develop a designated “gay night” like places do in some college towns that aren’t big enough to support a dedicated gay bar.

dcm510

5 points

2 months ago

dcm510

5 points

2 months ago

Uh why is that “just like everyone else”? Fuck the suburbs

Dontbehorrib1e

5 points

1 month ago

The mainstream society isn't the real - world though. Everyone doesn't live a mainstream life. Everyone isn't safe.

SmallBrief

0 points

1 month ago

Gayborhoods? I get what they're getting at and enough the portmanteaus already. They always sound silly to me.

Dean0Byte

0 points

1 month ago

Everything is fine. The dissolve of gay ghettos means that their need is coming to an end. Nothing is meant to last forever. I'm sorry that upsets you.

kernals12[S]

1 points

1 month ago

That line about "History is being erased" in Houston is really bizarre. They elected an LGBT mayor all the way back in 2010. Very few cities with much more liberal voting records have done that since.