Should closeted celebs be 'outed'?

[kevinbeau]

Why "celebrities" shall have to make a big annoucement about their sexual lives? Have you ever seen people like Alec Baldwin summon the press and say: "I have an important statement to make: I'm heterosexual"; I don't think so. True that people like Ellen Degeneres or Rosie O'Donnell (bless them) have made a point of adressing their sexual orientation in public, because it was important for them. But when all things are considered, sex is not such an important aspect of life (and I will probably be crucified for saying that). We may speculate about the sex lives of such and such "celebrity", but in fact, what happens behind closed doors, between consenting ADULTS (and insist on that) is none of our business.

That being said, I might make and exeption when we are dealing with politicians (the civilian lawmakers) or "religious leaders" (the moral lawmakers) who build their carreer on the back of the LGBT communities, trying to impose retrograde values on society, and caught soliciting sex, or in otherwise compromising position bordering on hypocrisy, in that case, I'm in favor of putting their nose in their own bulls***...

I somwhat agree ,but i'd like to add that very often sex( not gender) IS identity....it's who you are....not just who you lay behind doors....

here's a hypothetical scenario where a influential celebrity may do some good by coming out....

Dolly Parton is a lesbian (trust me on this one)...I absolutely LOVE her, and her talent....
her whole career, she has had her stage persona, poor farm girl, god fearing and loving Baptist, crowd pleaser....smashing entertainer and a woman of sass, wit, and a good heart....she has many fans, and many look up to Dolly....

what if she went on Leno, and said I have something I'd like to say ....my girlfriend and I have been talking alot, and I'd like to set the record straight ()......I am a lesbian, I love women, I love sleeping with them ,I love my girlfriend, and though I have never spoke out before, I'm proud to be who I am and I want the world to know....

then she tells all her fans, her Southern fans especially ,that God loves her and all gays.....don't believe your Bibles, we are not to be hurt, blamed, killed or damned......after the stunned silence, then the mixture of booing and cheering subsided.....maybe alot of people would look at gays and lesbians differently.....they love Dolly too much to overlook her message and her honesty.....

now, I don't think this will ever happen (her very sad manager/business partner, old gay Sandy Gallen would never allow it)....but it's a lovely hope, and I do believe in this instance one person could change the minds of many people.......I'm not outing Dolly, most people here in town know anyway.....but it's a lovely hope....

 

[falconfan]

no, actually you went into a graduate student type philosophical/linguistic obfuscation of gay.

No I stated my opinion because you claimed I was espousing the fact being gay was next and I said to the contrary I don't find any morality attached to sexuality good or bad. And I don't need celebrities to tell me that. I don't need there to be a million gay guys to know that. I'm more than happy to know that myself. Live my life. And leave others, famous or non, gay or straight, to live their own lives.

 

[falconfan]

AH- the staff knows- the parents on the other hand can raise alot of shit- AND HAVE...the kids just spread it around like a tabloid, you try putting up with- I do and have lived to tell the tale is all I'm saying-... please don't put my experience down when you know absolutley nothing about it!!! To quote from my favorite muscial- La Cage Aux Folles...'I am what I am, and what I am needs no excuses....Your life is a sham until you can shout out- hey world, I am what I am' I accept the argument that I don't have the right to out someone, but I'm of the opinion that no one has the right to hide in a closet, especially when others are fighting and in some cases dying for YOUR rights...talk about a parasitic existence.

OK ummmm I don't know anyone "dying" for my rights first of all.

Second I didn't mean to "put down" your experience, I simply don't feel their comparable situations. And I don't know how you can be on such a high horse about celebrities having "no right" to hide when you yourself claimed to have been forced out of the closet by students...

Not to mention that privacy is not equivalent to "hiding." I just can't right everyone off as the same. I realize that people's situations are different and sometimes it's just not the right time for some. Period. And if I can do something to benifit another person I don't really care if they've done it themselves are not. To me that just seems pretty selfish and lacking in basic human understanding because I know there was a time when I wouldn't have been strong enough to stand for MYSELF and I appreciate that in those times of weakness there were people to stand for me. After all I get by with a little help from my friends...

 

[kevinbeau]

No I stated my opinion because you claimed I was espousing the fact being gay was next and I said to the contrary I don't find any morality attached to sexuality good or bad. And I don't need celebrities to tell me that. I don't need there to be a million gay guys to know that. I'm more than happy to know that myself. Live my life. And leave others, famous or non, gay or straight, to live their own lives.

of whose teachings, by what writings, by which discipline, do you define morality or amorality? may we readers have some insight to your thinking?

 

[falconfan]

of whose teachings, by what writings, by which discipline, do you define morality or amorality? may we readers have some insight to your thinking?

Well first one need not justify their view of morality with someone elses teachings, writings, and discipline, morality is the ultimate opinion question of which we're all free to form our own. The fact such a set of rules existed or a number of people believe it don't add validity to an opinion. Because in reality people like Socrates and other philosophers drew their conclusions from logic and reason so logic and reason can justify such opinions without any such writings or teaching.

Regardless is you want my moral philosophy it's very simple. If someone hurts someone it's amoral. If it helps someone it's moral. And if it does neither it's neutral. It's simple but gets much more complicated because obviously hurting one person(s) and helping other person(s) are not mutually exclusive so I'm not going to go in depth espousing a whole moral philosophy here it's really unimportant. What's important is this. There is no substantial difference between loving someone of the same sex and loving someone of a different sex. None is more moral than the next. To certain people some are more natural than the other. But a man born gay is no less moral nor amoral than a man born straight. Neither is "good" or "bad" they just are and I'll never be convinced otherwise.

 

[kevinbeau]

Well first one need not justify their view of morality with someone elses teachings, writings, and discipline, morality is the ultimate opinion question of which we're all free to form our own. The fact such a set of rules existed or a number of people believe it don't add validity to an opinion. Because in reality people like Socrates and other philosophers drew their conclusions from logic and reason so logic and reason can justify such opinions without any such writings or teaching.

Regardless is you want my moral philosophy it's very simple. If someone hurts someone it's amoral. If it helps someone it's moral. And if it does neither it's neutral. It's simple but gets much more complicated because obviously hurting one person(s) and helping other person(s) are not mutually exclusive so I'm not going to go in depth espousing a whole moral philosophy here it's really unimportant. What's important is this. There is no substantial difference between loving someone of the same sex and loving someone of a different sex. None is more moral than the next. To certain people some are more natural than the other. But a man born gay is no less moral nor amoral than a man born straight. Neither is "good" or "bad" they just are and I'll never be convinced otherwise.

actually, in an arguement, or discussion one or the other must clarify their position and footnote their points and personal philosophy.......unless you are the 1st person to think as you do (congrats if so).....there are antecedents.....

to claim logic and reason as self obvious or an unquestionable given is not selfless...it shows arrogance.....to claim that each individual is free to form their own morality question is a fairly idealistic view....and very dangerous....

 

[falconfan]

actually, in an arguement, or discussion one or the other must clarify their position and footnote their points and personal philosophy.......unless you are the 1st person to think as you do (congrats if so).....there are antecedents.....

to claim logic and reason as self obvious or an unquestionable given is not selfless...it shows arrogance.....to claim that each individual is free to form their own morality question is a fairly idealistic view....and very dangerous....

It's the concept of independent creation my friend. It's certainly not beyond the scope of history for two or more people to arrive at the same philosophy what makes it right is the logic and reason behind the assessment not the number and names of people who agree with or have agreed with it. And I don't believe it's in anyway arrogant I firmly believe everyones moral and religious believes are their own. Sure there are templates we're taught but how much of that we accept and take to heart are all our own. As for it being "dangerous" it is no such thing. It's certaintly less dangerous than allowing a handful of people decide what is "moral" and what is "not" Morality is in someone ways a silly concept in that it has no concrete definition. That is infact what we argue over when argue if something is Good or Bad the definition of good and bad themselves. We all think we no what it is... who's right? We can never prove it for sure. We can use logic and reason to try but it's impossible for the entire world to come to terms on what "good" entail yet we firmly believe such things do exist. So when a question like this comes up a "should" question, a question of morality one attempts to convey their opinion using logic and reason to express why their idea of good is THE proper interpretation of good. But we're veering off topic your off-topic accusations that I consider homosexuality to be "bad" are incorrect; I do not. If you want to discuss the nature of homosexuality and teh morality attached your in the wrong thread.

 

[falconfan]

people have died- hate crimes against gays are up- across the board- you people just want to have a bitch slap fight...whatever, done, have a nice life safe and secure that you've done nothing for the future of the gay community.... and I clearly said it's an opinion- one I wouldn't force on anyone else...who's being militant here....

I don't mean to disrespect Matthew Shepherd or anyone who had been the victim of a hate crime but that is NOT "dying for rights" He was living his life and was a victim of a terrible crime. Giving your life for rights would be something more along the lines of being murdered at a protest or march or in a war of some sort. If you're taking a stand for an issue and are killed directly because of that stand then you're dying FOR something being a victim of a hate crime is just a horrible travesty.

 

[kevinbeau]

It's the concept of independent creation my friend. It's certainly not beyond the scope of history for two or more people to arrive at the same philosophy what makes it right is the logic and reason behind the assessment not the number and names of people who agree with or have agreed with it. And I don't believe it's in anyway arrogant I firmly believe everyones moral and religious believes are their own. Sure there are templates we're taught but how much of that we accept and take to heart are all our own. As for it being "dangerous" it is no such thing. It's certaintly less dangerous than allowing a handful of people decide what is "moral" and what is "not" Morality is in someone ways a silly concept in that it has no concrete definition. That is infact what we argue over when argue if something is Good or Bad the definition of good and bad themselves. We all think we no what it is... who's right? We can never prove it for sure. We can use logic and reason to try but it's impossible for the entire world to come to terms on what "good" entail yet we firmly believe such things do exist. So when a question like this comes up a "should" question, a question of morality one attempts to convey their opinion using logic and reason to express why their idea of good is THE proper interpretation of good. But we're veering off topic your off-topic accusations that I consider homosexuality to be "bad" are incorrect; I do not. If you want to discuss the nature of homosexuality and teh morality attached your in the wrong thread.

Hey Falconfan is that a picture of you in your avatar? You are very cute 21yr old and a genius ,too....hot....so fuckable!!!

 

[falconfan]

Hey Falconfan is that a picture of you in your avatar? You are very cute 21yr old and a genius ,too....hot....so fuckable!!!

That's Jensen Ackles. He's an actor. He plays Dean in "Supernatural" but I must say he is most certainly fuckable to an extreme

 

[kevinbeau]

pity........

 

[unclaimedblessing]

Perhaps gay celebs (and the rest of us) should be forced to wear pink triangles.
That worked out so well the last time it was tried.

 

[audancerboy]

To sign on board with my own opinion, like many of the people before me, I don't really care who is gay and who is not, and I don't think they should be outed if they are. However, those who are making publicly anti-gay statements and then going in for some same-sex fun afterwards do need to be exposed. I have no issue exposing a hypocrite; people's hypocrisy needs to be exposed, because it is evil.

 

[deltablues2]

No. That's disgusting. Your own personal life is just that - personal. It's no one's business.

If people had their own lives they wouldn't try to run someone else's