This is a strange article. It’s like asking, are cars red?
Yes, some cars are red. But cars don’t have to be red, and red things don’t have to be cars.
Pointing out the obvious, gender identity and sexual orientation are entirely different vectors.
Since most of the population is cisgender, most gay men are cisgender.
The article debates whether “calling gay men out” as cisgender is productive. You can call a car a car. You can call it a Mongolian longbow, or you can call it Genevieve. It’s still a car.
Cisgender men who are attracted to men are cisgender and gay. Trans men who are attracted to men are transgender and gay. This is not “calling out,” this is stating facts.
It is immensely annoying when gay men speak over us trans women. (Memories of Silvia Rivera in 1971.)
Cisgender men attracted to men, whether they’re very butch or they’re doing a Billy Porter thing or even a RuPaul thing, are cisgender men.
A good way to be an ally is to boost the voices of marginalized demographics. Any cisgender gay man who boosts up the voices of trans women is a great ally (Thank you, Billy Porter!) Any cisgender man that hijacks the narratives of trans women, speaks over us, appropriates from us, is NOT a great ally.
It is not our job to nursemaid allies. Those who are stalwart allies will stand by us. And those who are fragile, shallow, hypocritical or too distracted to care will move on. And it’s not our job to provide crutches for them. We have our own problems.
I say again, this is a very strange article. Some cars are red. Some red things are cars. And protesting that some cars are not quite as red as other cars are red is a silly thing on which to take up words — and the reader’s time.