Should closeted celebs be 'outed'?

[GanymedeATL]

I'm against outing anyone, regardless of what they choose for a career. Here in America, we have a representative democracy, which means that the people we vote into office represent the voters, not their own personal interests. It's not hypocrisy to vote according to the wishes of your constituency, even if it doesn't line up necessarily with your personal beliefs. I don't care what my representatives do in the bedroom (and if you knew my representatives, you'd know why.LOL!), but I DO care how they legislate, because that affects me.
As far as celebrities go, they do indeed sell a portion of their privacy in order to get where they are, but the portion that they sell should be up to them.
I've never had a career where my sexual preference made a difference, but I've dated guys who did, and when it became uncomfortable for me, I ended it. But, again, personal choice.

 

[kevinbeau]

i vote yes....Hollywood and the Media are selling tickets and cars etc., based on ideas and personas which are very narrow...and antiquated...
if an individual tries to break those rules....they may never make it...if they comply, they are rewarded....
an individual needs to come to terms with their sexuality, and then decide how thus to live......
homosexuality is still despised in our culture out of fear, disgust, and religious intolerence....

we can all be free, make changes,and live better.....gay celebrities could make a difference....

 

[falconfan]

This is an issue that always just makes me shake my head. People don't seem to understand that circumstances surrounding everyones life are different. People are different. They have their own reasons and families and fears. I sure as hell would not have been happy if someone outed me before I was ready and I would never ever do that to some one else.

And to those of you saying that outing celebrities could help the gay community as a whole...
A) It won't. Because they're not going to be strong role models and such they're going to deny it. The only result will be scandalizing homosexuality landing it in the rag sheets next to drug abuse, eating disorders, and crimes. You're just furthering the negative connotation of homosexuality
B) Yes they "could" make a difference but you have no right to make them. I respect any person who is willing to take the yolk of civic responsibility and activism on themselves but no one should have this forced upon them. There's always pain, suffering, and hard ship involved with making a change because their are always people who don't want those changes to be made. Now if you step into that fire maybe you'll have the strength of will to walk on through it all and stand tall but if you're just tossed in you're just going to burnt to death. It is no one mans job to take change an entire society and it is unfair to force it upon anyone. It is our job as a whole, as a mass, to stand up and have the strength of character and will to make those changes ourselves. If you really want changes to be made YOU make them don't try to force someone else to do it. Yes if you choose any random entertainer/politician I'm sure they COULD do more but so could you. Whoever you are I'm quite sure you could be doing more to reduce your carbon footprint, fight poverty, and world hunger. You could join the Peace Corp and go help hundreds of underprivledged suffering men and women but does that mean I'm going to sign you up? No. Because I have no right to do that. Would you be a better person if you did it? Probably. But I can't make you be a better person. I can't make help others. If these closeted men and women are putting their emotional and personal well being in front of that of the general homosexual world than let them because I'm SURE every time you make a decision you don't first put every other person in the world before you and I'm not saying you're a bad person for that because I do the same thing. We all do. We as human beings are to some degree selfish. How selfish is up to us. As long as we're not infringing upon the rights of others (ie. murder or theft) no one has any right to regulate just how selfish we are. And to expect a celebrity to be selfless so the masses (containing you) won't be hurt IS being selfish... essentially you're being selfish and demanding they be selfless... now that's quite hypocritical to me.

 

[tavares]

I vote it's a personal decision -- I just ask that they don't insult us by claiming to be straight with their trophy girlfriends, yet carry on with the same sex behind closed doors. If it's a personal decision, then every aspect of that part of your life should be personal. I don't want to know about your wedding plans to your beard if I can't know about your midnight romps with your "best friend." If one thing is private then so is the other.

 

[Homoaffectional]

I don't bemoan the "outing" of the rabidly "anti-gay"! So many politicians & 'religious leaders' who rant against the gl&tg community have been revealed to be closet cases, that one may only wonder just what being anti-gay really means.

In the early 90's when outing first came to the attention of the media it was used by queer groups like Queer Nation and Act Up!, to expose the hypocrisy of closeted politicians who actively promote an anti-gay agenda.

Here in Canada we have several gay politicians, who are not out but who are incredibly supportive and very important allies to the queer community. I see no reason to out these people.

However, we also have a former Head of Treasury Board, who is gay and super-closeted, who axed the Court Challenges program, a federal program used by minority groups (women, people of colour and queers) to sue the federal government to fight institutional discrimination and inequality. A person like him should definitely be outed.

As far as celebrities go, I think it only becomes an issue if they are homophobic and/or actively supportive of an anti-gay agenda. Celebs like that are fair game as far as I'm concerned.

Exactly and since there was no poll option reflecting this reality, I found myself unable to be voting in the poll altogether.

^ I considered adding a poll, but people tend to just vote and 'walk away' without explaining their reasons, and I'm always interested in why people arrive at the conclusions they post.

In my case, it's the opposite... I came by explaining my reasons for not actually voting in the poll... I request you add a few more categories and then I can vote, if you're interested... but the nosy part of you already knows how I feel so maybe you won't bother. Just the same...

 

[cityboy-stl]

I voted no but like many others I think any celebrity or politician who is secretly gay but uses their position to promote anti-gay discrimination for personal or political gain should be outed in a second. People like Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Ken Mehlman for example, definitely should be outed. But those who are supportive of gay rights but wish to keep their personal life personal, no, their wishes should be respected.

 

[quasar]

Everyone deserves some respect. That being said, I don't bemoan the "outing" of the rabidly "anti-gay"! So many politicians & 'religious leaders' who rant against the gl&tg community have been revealed to be closet cases, that one may only wonder just what being anti-gay really means.

In the early 90's when outing first came to the attention of the media it was used by queer groups like Queer Nation and Act Up!, to expose the hypocrisy of closeted politicians who actively promote an anti-gay agenda.

Here in Canada we have several gay politicians, who are not out but who are incredibly supportive and very important allies to the queer community. I see no reason to out these people.

However, we also have a former Head of Treasury Board, who is gay and super-closeted, who axed the Court Challenges program, a federal program used by minority groups (women, people of colour and queers) to sue the federal government to fight institutional discrimination and inequality. A person like him should definitely be outed.

As far as celebrities go, I think it only becomes an issue if they are homophobic and/or actively supportive of an anti-gay agenda. Celebs like that are fair game as far as I'm concerned.

Exactly and since there was no poll option reflecting this reality, I found myself unable to be voting in the poll altogether.

In my case, it's the opposite... I came by explaining my reasons for not actually voting in the poll... I request you add a few more categories and then I can vote, if you're interested... but the nosy part of you already knows how I feel so maybe you won't bother. Just the same...

Unfortunately I can't add more categories now that it's up and running, however, the question was posed as a result of other discussions that were very much 'black & white with no grey' type of arguments. Whilst the options are 'blanket' options that do not take into account the hypocritical entertainers and other public figures, I was hoping that someone like cs388 would expand it and refer to exceptions.

My personal view is that it is a private matter, but if someone - like some of our closeted gay politicians - uses their position to vote against gay agenda issues, then they are fair game - in the same way that ****** ********'s lawyers threaten action against anyone who says too much about him - despite the fact that it's common knowledge he likes his male escort's company more than his wife's!!!

Its the hypocritical ones that I want to 'out'.... but you COULD start a thread in Hot Topics about 'what being anti-gay really means' - it should make an interesting topic!

 

[Críostóir]

I voted NO.

Unless it is a person like Ted Haggard or Larry Craig who publicly try to make the lives of gay people hard, but in private they are big mansluts. Then they must be outed to show their hypocrisy.

I'm with you. I voted no, but I wish there'd been an option for "Public homophobes." I don't care if they're entertainment celebrities or politicians in that case. If someone found gay dirt on e.g. Eddie Murphy, I think it should be shouted from the rooftops!

But as for non-hypocrites...leave them the hell alone. Why would you want to make their lives harder, when they've done nothing to harm you?

 

[Homoaffectional]

Unfortunately I can't add more categories now that it's up and running, however, the question was posed as a result of other discussions that were very much 'black & white with no grey' type of arguments. Whilst the options are 'blanket' options that do not take into account the hypocritical entertainers and other public figures, I was hoping that someone like cs388 would expand it and refer to exceptions.

My personal view is that it is a private matter, but if someone - like some of our closeted gay politicians - uses their position to vote against gay agenda issues, then they are fair game - in the same way that ****** ********'s lawyers threaten action against anyone who says too much about him - despite the fact that it's common knowledge he likes his male escort's company more than his wife's!!!

Its the hypocritical ones that I want to 'out'....

Thanks for your thoughts!

but you COULD start a thread in Hot Topics about 'what being anti-gay really means' - it should make an interesting topic!

I would start a thread in Hot Topics, but I find most of the threads there to be sophomoric in quality (or lack thereof). Anyway, I'm not sure if you ever venture into the CE&P board, but I'm sure this thread has been discussed to death, but obviously with more emphasis on the politicians than the celebrities (although they're probably mentioned occassionally). But thanks for giving me a rare incentive to wade outside of either the two Politics forums, the Entertainment forum, or the feedback forum.

 

[hermanding]

did not check any casilla - nothing applied totally.
if the celeb makes hateful remarks about gays, then i say 'out' him or her.. if they do not, i can understand their concern for career etc and am fine with their leading their double life. of course, that double life is their problem.
but, again, no one should be able to hide their sexuality at the expense of others who share that sexuality
ding

 

[falconfan]

Homophobic closet cases need not be outed to be discredited their own repulsive words do that for them.

 

[reallyrandy]

I voted "No it's a personal decision" but if there is a closeted gay politician who is against gay rights then they should be outed.

Ditto with everything you just said.

 

[lovetaurus]

I voted No..it should be person choice ...

 

[springboksfan]

Those who do damage to the community via word or deed and still seek to have their "cake" should most definitely be given a good hard shove into the cold cruel world outside the closet. Think "Wide Stance" or any of the other fag-hating-sucking politicians in Washington.

On the other hand, people like Jodie Foster, who want nothing more than to live their lives and do their work--and do so without harming the community--should probably be left alone.

That's a new compromise for me and is about as far as I'm willing to ever go. I'm not a fan of the closet and have very little respect for those who choose to live in it. It may be a personal choice, but it is dishonest to those you profess to care about.

 

[KURT10677]

Homophobic closet cases need not be outed to be discredited their own repulsive words do that for them.

Umm just cause your gay and want to flont it all around town thats your business. I'm in the closet and I'm doing just fine in there

 

[falconfan]

Umm just cause your gay and want to flont it all around town thats your business. I'm in the closet and I'm doing just fine in there

ummm I don't "flont" anything but I also assume to you're not homophobic. I was referring to people like Larry Craig who spews homophobic propaganda.

 

[redondobear]

No. Every human being need their own privacy and space.

I agree. Coming out is very personal and has NO bearing on whether someone can act or lead (Unless they spout homophobic bull####... THEN they get what they deserve)

 

[KURT10677]

ummm I don't "flont" anything but I also assume to you're not homophobic. I was referring to people like Larry Craig who spews homophobic propaganda.

Sorry bro

 

[mindigo]

no, let the person do it themself. besides, alot of these celebs mess w/ other dudes & chicks just for sex, or for fun or for enjoyment while their on that celeb 'high'. eventually they'll probably settle down, get married, have children...

'outing' them when they're not really gay would completely destroy them, therefore it shouldn't be done.

 

[sexymfer]

When are you going to contribute something of substance to one of those threads you looking??? Not all things are about fun in life. How many lives would you consider "fun" to destroy?

It's the internet, wtf do you expect? Everyone to be as *~serious~* as you? Bitch, please.