The League of Conservation Voters has pulled out of a forum on climate change that was to be co-hosted by The New Republic after the magazine ran (and then deleted) a “homophobic” hit-piece on 2020 candidate Pete Buttigieg — by a gay writer, no less.

As Twitchy has observed, the narrative that it’s conservatives who oppose a gay candidate just isn’t playing out; criticism of Buttigieg is coming from lefty outlets concerned that the South Bend mayor isn’t the right kind of gay.

TIME ran a cover of Buttigieg and his husband, Chasten, but their home life seemed so straight that critics called their relationship a display of “heterosexuality without women.” Slate’s Christina Cauterucci wrote a piece exposing Buttigieg as not only gay but also “white, male, upper-class, Midwestern, married, Ivy League–educated, and a man of faith” — all bad things, of course.

Then The Outline published a piece entitled, “Why Pete Buttigieg is bad for gays: Mayor Pete might be the most palatable gay man in America. That’s precisely the problem.”

To progressives, Buttigieg might be gay, but he’s not GAY. And that seemed to be the problem writer Dale Peck touched on in his piece for The New Republic, “My Mayor Pete Problem.” CNN reports that Peck continually referred to Buttigieg as “Mary Pete” and satirically suggested that the married Buttigieg “would be sexually promiscuous” in the White House.

It is interesting, it’s certainly not the first, and it’s been exclusively from the Left as far as we’ve seen, unless you consider Slate and TIME conservative outlets.

Maybe progressive gays should look in a mirror and figure out what it is about Democrat candidate Pete Buttigieg makes them so hostile.