That is playing with semantics. Just like femboy/trap content is a niche so is gay content. Adhering that strictly to pedantics is being disingenuous at best and completely ignorant at worst. Trap content isn't gay content because it doesn't appeal to gay men. Straight guys who're a little curious like the idea of dipping their toe into some m/m that's flavored entirely like what they're used to; gay guys want to see masculine characters hooking up and romancing each other.
Straight boys surely do love to straightsplain to gay men what is and isn't gay but that's their own hang-up. Gay is a particular flavor of m/m just like trap content is and the gay version of the whole negative stigma surrounding the idea of traps is hearing gay but finding out that it's more stuff for straight boys.
You could just as easily make the argument that all content is "niche" content. Just add silly tags like "tight jeans" or "bathroom tiles" and what was incidental can be presented as purposeful. Actually, on other websites I've seen recurring demands for a "vanilla" tag for porn that is "cavity inducing," so there might been more to that than I thought...everything is a fetish, I guess.
Have you ever heard of Flashgitz? There's a video titled "Destiny is Fabulous" that addresses our argument neatly. The quote I have in mind: "You guys might not be
homosexual, but you're definitely fucking gay."
Homo - same. Homosexual - same sex.
Not all arachnids are scorpions, but all scorpions are arachnids.
Not all gay content is trap content, but all trap content is gay content.
Content needs not
appeal to anyone to merit its tag, but it does need to sufficiently match the tag's definition.
I suppose we're discussing porn taxonomy, now. What was the original argument?
>Trap content isn't gay content because it doesn't appeal to gay men
You speak for all gay men? Astounding. I thought there might be more variety and nuance to sexuality in general, but perhaps my error was thinking that to be gay was to be attracted to men while being a man.
>Straight boys surely do love to straightsplain
You demean yourself with that cringe-inducing diction, but
yes.
This and many other websites have an overwhelming abundance of evidence showing that
everyone has a compulsive need to explain and argue the finer points of sexuality in general, though thankfully not at all times. Did you expect me to be offended by such a self-evident truth?
The argument I think you
meant to make is that it would spare gay men who aren't interested in traps a little time and disappointment if "trap" was distinguished from "gay." It actually is--this site has a tag for "trap." But, referring to the bulk of our argument, people will continuously disagree on when and where and how and why it ought to be applied.
Off the top of my head I can think of several arguments:
>There's a trap character in a game with no sex scenes.
People will argue about whether the game needs the tag or not simply because the character exists.
>There's a trap character who looks a little more masculine than androgynous or feminine.
People will argue about whether or not the character
is a trap.
>There's a trap character, but they TF into a woman before you can romance them.
People will argue not only over the trap tag, but whether it's gay to have sex with someone that used to be male.
>There's a female character who TFs into a trap or shemale.
See above.
>There's a female character who
can TF into a trap, shemale, or male depending on the player's actions.
There are people who will actually argue that if the potential exists, all outcomes apply. Whether they're just trolling or actually believe that, I leave for you to decide.
I hope you see my point. Categorizing and indexing will never be perfect by anyone's standard, and people will argue semantics and definitions almost endlessly--doubly so where their sexuality is concerned. This post itself is an example.
