Gay Hollywood
- Thread starter Gryffindorian
- Start date
I wasn't 100% sure, but I wanted an excuse to post that photo.
I do recall the rumour, but it's been many years since I'd heard it. I think RoJoHen is right - people denigrate Keanu mostly because he's just not that good an actor.
On the Keanu issue, I also had no idea what stj was going on about until he explained more clearly, so I think that can be written off as someone thinking they're explaining themselves because they understand it in their own heads but are actually not explaining it as clearly as they think they are.
Now that I know what he was talking about, I agree with the others that a) I wasn't aware there was much of a backlash against Mr Reeves; b) if there is, it's based on his general lack of acting talent, not perceived sexuality; c) the rumour to which stj refers is more than a decade old; and d) things have changed a hell of a lot in Hollywood in the intervening time. And Reeves hasn't really had all the much of a career to complain about lately, has he?
As a counter example, I point you to the very people on which we began this thread. Look at Zachary Quinto. Look at Ian McKellen. Look at John Barrowman. Headliners (or co-headliners at least) of some of the biggest franchises in TV and movie history, and all of them openly gay while being so. To be fair, sci-fi-fantasy has always been more accepting of this kind of thing than the mainstream movie industry, but any progress is some progress.
This whole thing is a snowball effect. It was difficult to get the ball rolling, and the first actors to come out publicly had a harder time of it, no question. But the more who come out, then the more who feel free to come out after them. And the more used to the whole thing audiences become, until eventually we get to the point where nobody blinks an eye anymore. As I said before, we're not quite there yet, but we're a hell of a lot closer than we used to be.
Which is not to say that all gay actors are prepared to say so yet. Jeremy Renner lived an openly gay life like Matt Bomer until the massive success of The Hurt Locker, at which point somebody somewhere in his publicity team suggested that the higher profile required somewhat tighter discretion. And it's a shame that Renner appears to have gone along with it. On the other hand, I fear we've pretty much lost him to the Scientological machinations of La Cruise anyway.
I would love for Taylor Lautner to become the first openly gay action movie star. According to the Blind Items he's battling his handlers tooth and nail for the freedom to come out, but they don't want him to. He may not be much of an actual thespian either, but he's damn sure got the look, and if The Rock can make a career as a actor then Lautner sure as hell can. And I've love for him to be able to do it as an openly gay man from the start, rather than only come out once his career has peaked and troughed again.
Welsh actor Luke Evans was so openly gay at the beginning of his career that he talked about all the men he slept with in London and what kind of gay porn he liked. He said he would never want to closet himself because he would never want to put himself in a position where his skeletons could be dragged out. Then, after he too received Hollywood success in major movies like Immortals, suddenly his PR people were saying that they don't comment on his personal life and whatever he may or may not have said previously was when he was young and immature, and then they set him up with a girlfriend. Now maybe Luke is actually bisexual - I understand such people do actually exist - but he never mentioned being bisexual before. He said gay. Which makes it a very sad case of someone re-closeting themselves for the sake of Hollywood fame. (Although I suspect it's his agent pushing a lot of that, not Luke himself.)
So yes, things are not perfect. But we've made some fucking amazing strides.
.
Now that I know what he was talking about, I agree with the others that a) I wasn't aware there was much of a backlash against Mr Reeves; b) if there is, it's based on his general lack of acting talent, not perceived sexuality; c) the rumour to which stj refers is more than a decade old; and d) things have changed a hell of a lot in Hollywood in the intervening time. And Reeves hasn't really had all the much of a career to complain about lately, has he?
As a counter example, I point you to the very people on which we began this thread. Look at Zachary Quinto. Look at Ian McKellen. Look at John Barrowman. Headliners (or co-headliners at least) of some of the biggest franchises in TV and movie history, and all of them openly gay while being so. To be fair, sci-fi-fantasy has always been more accepting of this kind of thing than the mainstream movie industry, but any progress is some progress.
This whole thing is a snowball effect. It was difficult to get the ball rolling, and the first actors to come out publicly had a harder time of it, no question. But the more who come out, then the more who feel free to come out after them. And the more used to the whole thing audiences become, until eventually we get to the point where nobody blinks an eye anymore. As I said before, we're not quite there yet, but we're a hell of a lot closer than we used to be.
Which is not to say that all gay actors are prepared to say so yet. Jeremy Renner lived an openly gay life like Matt Bomer until the massive success of The Hurt Locker, at which point somebody somewhere in his publicity team suggested that the higher profile required somewhat tighter discretion. And it's a shame that Renner appears to have gone along with it. On the other hand, I fear we've pretty much lost him to the Scientological machinations of La Cruise anyway.
I would love for Taylor Lautner to become the first openly gay action movie star. According to the Blind Items he's battling his handlers tooth and nail for the freedom to come out, but they don't want him to. He may not be much of an actual thespian either, but he's damn sure got the look, and if The Rock can make a career as a actor then Lautner sure as hell can. And I've love for him to be able to do it as an openly gay man from the start, rather than only come out once his career has peaked and troughed again.
Welsh actor Luke Evans was so openly gay at the beginning of his career that he talked about all the men he slept with in London and what kind of gay porn he liked. He said he would never want to closet himself because he would never want to put himself in a position where his skeletons could be dragged out. Then, after he too received Hollywood success in major movies like Immortals, suddenly his PR people were saying that they don't comment on his personal life and whatever he may or may not have said previously was when he was young and immature, and then they set him up with a girlfriend. Now maybe Luke is actually bisexual - I understand such people do actually exist - but he never mentioned being bisexual before. He said gay. Which makes it a very sad case of someone re-closeting themselves for the sake of Hollywood fame. (Although I suspect it's his agent pushing a lot of that, not Luke himself.)
So yes, things are not perfect. But we've made some fucking amazing strides.
.
Last edited:
Wow. Although I had heard about the Keanu Reeves rumor before, it was pretty old and in retrospect, I don't think a lot of people gave a damn, even back then.
As for Jeremy Renner, as lvsxy808 stated, I didn't know about that. He's going to star in the next Bourne movie (sans Matt Damon), and if his PR people are trying to "hide" his identity, then that makes sense (though unfortunate). For some people, it would be hard to take seriously an openly gay actor playing a straight, tough-as-nails guy in a leading role.
And Taylor Lautner? I thought that was just a rumor.
As for Jeremy Renner, as lvsxy808 stated, I didn't know about that. He's going to star in the next Bourne movie (sans Matt Damon), and if his PR people are trying to "hide" his identity, then that makes sense (though unfortunate). For some people, it would be hard to take seriously an openly gay actor playing a straight, tough-as-nails guy in a leading role.
And Taylor Lautner? I thought that was just a rumor.
The only way many people will start to accept gay actors playing action heroes is if they start playing them. I think we are in a place in the States that if the movie is good, enough people will accept a gay actor for the movie to make money, which in Hollywood is the bottom line.
True, if only many people in America weren't a bunch of closed-minded ignorant jerks. It could also work if the viewers didn't know about the gay actor's personal life.
An amusing little article:
http://bangkokbois.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/gay-of-the-week-jeremy-renner/
Officially it is, but it's one I believe. You and I are never going to get personal, face-to-face confirmation, alas, unless we win the lottery and buy him for a night. But he's one of those people around whom there is simply too much smoke for there not to be some flames.
But that's the same double standard I mentioned earlier, though. We know every tiny detail of straight people's personal lives, down to their gynecological tests and whether they shave their balls or not. But when it comes to gay actors, publicists are too often saying, "I don't talk about my client's personal life." Bullshit. What you mean is, "He's a big ol' gayer, but either I or he or both of us are to scared to say so, but I don't want to lie either, so I'll just try to avoid the question." People are too savvy for that these days.
And the bearding process is still alive and well, unfortunately. Plenty of women make whole careers out of being professional beards. Hell, announcing you're dating Taylor Swift is pretty much the equivalent of a People magazine "I'm gay!" cover story.
.
Last edited:
^ Interesting, I see your point. You've explained it to me better than I could've understood it myself. My answer was "yes" and "no" to the question of whether or not it matters when a celebrity makes a revelation about his/her orientation. I said an actor's homosexuality shouldn't affect his career, but in a lot of ways, it can. There is indeed a double standard in our society.
My answer was "yes" and "no" to the question of whether or not it matters when a celebrity makes a revelation about his/her orientation. I said an actor's homosexuality shouldn't affect his career, but in a lot of ways, it can. There is indeed a double standard in our society.
Don't get me wrong - it's definitely getting better, to coin a phrase. The double standard is lessening as LGBTs become more visible in society.
Back in the classic movie days of Rock Hudson and Cary Grant, etc, it never occured to people that their favourite movie star might be gay. Such things simply weren't on people's radar, certainly not as anything anybody *they* liked would do. Now of course, you're nobody in Hollywood until the gay rumours start. That means you've been noticed.
It's much harder for a gay actor to remain closeted these days, because first of all people know and accept that gays are out there, and secondly everybody wants to know everybody else's business in the current celebrity-obsessed culture. It's really not a big deal anymore.
Which makes it that bit sadder that some of them still can't bring themselves to come out. It's 2012, and there they sit, watching Neil Patrick Harris and Zachary Quinto et al having perfectly successful careers as openly gay men - *more* successful I'd say now that they're out - and it having no deleterious effect at all. So why can't they do it too?
In some cases - like the aforementioned Couch Jumper Cruise - they've simply dug themselves too deep a hole to climb out of now. If they finally admit they're gay after so many outraged denials, it just makes them look like even more of a wretched hypocrite. Better to stay buried at this point, no matter how miserable it makes them. Which is why if you must stay quiet about it, at least just laugh it off as an irrelevance instead of suing left right and centre.
I think two actors who are handling it absolutely perfectly lately are Daniel Radcliffe and James Franco. Both actually genuinely straight, but so genuinely unconcerned about it one way or the other that they are prepared to play with the idea constantly and are enormously supportive of gay causes. Franco especially seems absolutely fascinated with gay characters and gay people, and I think we could do with more actors - and more straight men - like him.
It was very heartening recently to see in the Metro newspaper here in London, a photo of George Michael and his new boyfriend together on holiday. There wasn't the slightest whiff of scandal or sensationalism about it. He was just included in the celebrity pages along with everyone else. Just a matter of "Here's a picture of George Michael and his boyfriend on a boat." What little text there was was not "OMG he's gay!!11!" but rather was about his recovery from his pneumonia. And mind, this is not in any major leading national newspaper - this is just the free rag that they hand out on the trains.
Granted, the UK is more forward on these matters than the US is in large part. The number of openly gay presenter-entertainers here is outrageous. But even in the US, the culture has changed to the point where it's no longer socially acceptable to be anti-gay. Look at the number of celebrities who have been forced to make public apologies for saying or posting or tweeting something homophobic lately. Whether they mean it or not (and I dare say a lot of them don't) is irrelevant - they are coming to understand that they can't just say this stuff and expect to get away with it.
Which is a long way to go to basically say I agree with you - the answer is yes and no. No, they shouldn't have to announce their sexuality in a perfect world. No, it shouldn't have an effect on their careers. But yes, it does have an effect, even if that effect is mostly self-imposed these days. And yes, they do need to come out, so that there are more openly LGBT people in the public eye and people can have the chance to get the fuck over it already.
.
Back in the classic movie days of Rock Hudson and Cary Grant, etc, it never occured to people that their favourite movie star might be gay. Such things simply weren't on people's radar, certainly not as anything anybody *they* liked would do. Now of course, you're nobody in Hollywood until the gay rumours start. That means you've been noticed.
It's much harder for a gay actor to remain closeted these days, because first of all people know and accept that gays are out there, and secondly everybody wants to know everybody else's business in the current celebrity-obsessed culture. It's really not a big deal anymore.
Which makes it that bit sadder that some of them still can't bring themselves to come out. It's 2012, and there they sit, watching Neil Patrick Harris and Zachary Quinto et al having perfectly successful careers as openly gay men - *more* successful I'd say now that they're out - and it having no deleterious effect at all. So why can't they do it too?
In some cases - like the aforementioned Couch Jumper Cruise - they've simply dug themselves too deep a hole to climb out of now. If they finally admit they're gay after so many outraged denials, it just makes them look like even more of a wretched hypocrite. Better to stay buried at this point, no matter how miserable it makes them. Which is why if you must stay quiet about it, at least just laugh it off as an irrelevance instead of suing left right and centre.
I think two actors who are handling it absolutely perfectly lately are Daniel Radcliffe and James Franco. Both actually genuinely straight, but so genuinely unconcerned about it one way or the other that they are prepared to play with the idea constantly and are enormously supportive of gay causes. Franco especially seems absolutely fascinated with gay characters and gay people, and I think we could do with more actors - and more straight men - like him.
It was very heartening recently to see in the Metro newspaper here in London, a photo of George Michael and his new boyfriend together on holiday. There wasn't the slightest whiff of scandal or sensationalism about it. He was just included in the celebrity pages along with everyone else. Just a matter of "Here's a picture of George Michael and his boyfriend on a boat." What little text there was was not "OMG he's gay!!11!" but rather was about his recovery from his pneumonia. And mind, this is not in any major leading national newspaper - this is just the free rag that they hand out on the trains.
Granted, the UK is more forward on these matters than the US is in large part. The number of openly gay presenter-entertainers here is outrageous. But even in the US, the culture has changed to the point where it's no longer socially acceptable to be anti-gay. Look at the number of celebrities who have been forced to make public apologies for saying or posting or tweeting something homophobic lately. Whether they mean it or not (and I dare say a lot of them don't) is irrelevant - they are coming to understand that they can't just say this stuff and expect to get away with it.
Which is a long way to go to basically say I agree with you - the answer is yes and no. No, they shouldn't have to announce their sexuality in a perfect world. No, it shouldn't have an effect on their careers. But yes, it does have an effect, even if that effect is mostly self-imposed these days. And yes, they do need to come out, so that there are more openly LGBT people in the public eye and people can have the chance to get the fuck over it already.
.
My first reaction was Damn, why is it that all good looking ones are gay. Then thought "good for him".
Life goes on.
Sorry to bump this older thread, but I didn't want to start a new one that was already related to this topic.
In the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine, there's a featured article titled "The New Art of Coming Out," (I think it's accessible only to readers who have a subscription service) which discusses the significance of a celebrity's sexual orientation and his/her outing process, from Ellen DeGeneres to the latest actors to acknowledge their sexual identities. I found the article to be very informative and enlightening, and the author(s) really hit the nail on the head when they discussed the evolution of coming out in the entertainment industry. The article reminded me of this thread.
Back in the 1990s when Ellen first came out, I didn't really pay that much attention, nor did I care. In the 1990s Ellen's announcement was a big deal, but at the same time it was a decade when society was starting to become more aware (if not accepting) of homosexuality on a cultural level. After many outings of other celebrities over the years--ranging from intimate magazine interviews to self-important disclosures the likes of a press conference--the process of coming out has become more "common" in that we the public no longer think it's a big deal, but still very much a significant aspect of a celebrity's life. Only there's less fanfare.
On a side note, I always assumed Jim Parsons from The Big Bang Theory was gay. I don't watch the show, so I don't know whether his character is gay or straight, but it was just a hunch.
In the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly magazine, there's a featured article titled "The New Art of Coming Out," (I think it's accessible only to readers who have a subscription service) which discusses the significance of a celebrity's sexual orientation and his/her outing process, from Ellen DeGeneres to the latest actors to acknowledge their sexual identities. I found the article to be very informative and enlightening, and the author(s) really hit the nail on the head when they discussed the evolution of coming out in the entertainment industry. The article reminded me of this thread.
Back in the 1990s when Ellen first came out, I didn't really pay that much attention, nor did I care. In the 1990s Ellen's announcement was a big deal, but at the same time it was a decade when society was starting to become more aware (if not accepting) of homosexuality on a cultural level. After many outings of other celebrities over the years--ranging from intimate magazine interviews to self-important disclosures the likes of a press conference--the process of coming out has become more "common" in that we the public no longer think it's a big deal, but still very much a significant aspect of a celebrity's life. Only there's less fanfare.
On a side note, I always assumed Jim Parsons from The Big Bang Theory was gay.
I don't watch the show, so I don't know whether his character is gay or straight, but it was just a hunch.
I read the story too, and it is basically exactly what we've been saying in this thread. The new coming out is "mentioning one's partner in passing" or saying "as a gay man..." in an an otherwise unrelated interview.
I think it's great. As I said earlier in the thread, some people have dug themselves such a deep hole at this point that it's easier to just stay there than try to back all the way out of it. But for an increasing number of people, this is the new way to go.
What I do find interesting though is that the article basically outs Chace Crawford (which simultaneously saying it would never do such a thing).
And yes, Jim Parsons is definitely gay. His character Sheldon is not gay, and not straight either - he's basically asexual, with a complete disinterest and mild revulsion of physical intimacy of any kind. Even his supposed "girlfriend" has never actually kissed him (except for that one time she was drunk, after which she promptly vomited). There are theories that the other star of Big Bang, Johnny Galecki, is also family, but that is as yet unconfirmed. It would make his sitcom coupledom with Sara Gilbert in both Big Bang and Roseanne a nice irony though, as she's gay too.
.
I think it's great. As I said earlier in the thread, some people have dug themselves such a deep hole at this point that it's easier to just stay there than try to back all the way out of it. But for an increasing number of people, this is the new way to go.
What I do find interesting though is that the article basically outs Chace Crawford (which simultaneously saying it would never do such a thing).
And yes, Jim Parsons is definitely gay. His character Sheldon is not gay, and not straight either - he's basically asexual, with a complete disinterest and mild revulsion of physical intimacy of any kind. Even his supposed "girlfriend" has never actually kissed him (except for that one time she was drunk, after which she promptly vomited). There are theories that the other star of Big Bang, Johnny Galecki, is also family, but that is as yet unconfirmed. It would make his sitcom coupledom with Sara Gilbert in both Big Bang and Roseanne a nice irony though, as she's gay too.
.
I believe that if you want to (forgive my 90's term here) "come out of the closet", good for you! More power to you! Be who you are and never look back! But, if you're not comfortable with it, or just simply don't find it to be necessary or relevant, then that works too. I myself love both genders, but never told anyone until now. Am I ashamed of that? Nope. I just don't see the point in divulging that detail about myself.
As far as a Celebrity coming out goes, I think it can be very beneficial. As J said, it gives them a role model, and more than likely helps them feel more comfortable with themselves as a whole.
As far as a Celebrity coming out goes, I think it can be very beneficial. As J said, it gives them a role model, and more than likely helps them feel more comfortable with themselves as a whole.
lvsxy808, I didn't read the part about Chace Crawford, but it wouldn't surprise me if he was. Again, I'm basing this on a hunch.
I think in the cases of Queen Latifah and Jodie Foster, the references to their sexual orientation were initially ambiguous. Jodie thanked her "partner," but at the time people didn't know whether the partner was a he or a she. Latifah mentioned she was glad "to be with her people" during a Pride celebration but didn't verbally acknowledge and say it out loud. There are those, like me (though I'm not a celebrity), who are in a glass closet, not out but not really in either.
I think in the cases of Queen Latifah and Jodie Foster, the references to their sexual orientation were initially ambiguous. Jodie thanked her "partner," but at the time people didn't know whether the partner was a he or a she. Latifah mentioned she was glad "to be with her people" during a Pride celebration but didn't verbally acknowledge and say it out loud. There are those, like me (though I'm not a celebrity), who are in a glass closet, not out but not really in either.
Honestly, I have no patience with forcibly or subtly "outing" anyone. I can't think of a more personal, sacrosanct issue than one's sexual identity. You (the general "you") get to decide the sexual identity of exactly one person -- yourself. If Tom Cruise is attracted to men more than/rather than women, well, that's between him and his wife. He doesn't owe a statement one way or the other to anyone. If someone else introduces his or her partner, or declines to answer an intrusive question, that's his or her prerogative.
Personally, actors and actresses are faces on a screen and names scrolling by. I don't care who they sleep with, who's the father or mother of their babies, or what their politics are. They don't need to validate anyone else's life at the expense of their own privacy.
Personally, actors and actresses are faces on a screen and names scrolling by. I don't care who they sleep with, who's the father or mother of their babies, or what their politics are. They don't need to validate anyone else's life at the expense of their own privacy.
Of course they do not have to and I do not mind if actors just do their job and then go home like everybody else does but if you are known you can use this very publicity to do something good.
It can be political stuff, it can be charity stuff and it can be outing yourself publicly and thus helping a few closet gay kids who live in a homophobic environment (it doesn't have to be strongly homophobic, a few stupid remarks by other kids can already make it pretty though) to be strong.
It can be political stuff, it can be charity stuff and it can be outing yourself publicly and thus helping a few closet gay kids who live in a homophobic environment (it doesn't have to be strongly homophobic, a few stupid remarks by other kids can already make it pretty though) to be strong.
I agree. A person's sexual orientation is nobody's business but his/her own. What I find pathetic (or mildly offensive), though, is when a person (celebrity or not) who in real life is LGBT blatantly denies it. There's a difference between not wanting to answer the question and flat out saying, "No, I'm not gay." Not too long ago, actor Jeremy Renner made such a statement. Somebody posted earlier in this thread a link to a blog alleging that Renner is gay - I don't know if it's legit. Now maybe he is or he isn't. But if it's the former, it would be extremely sad to see that Renner is denying his own identity.
No one has the right to force him out of the closet, though. Frankly, I don't care if he's gay or not because I think he's an amazing actor. (Frankly, I'm more bothered by his -admitted- past drug use and rumors that he still uses- but that's more of a 'I don't want him to die or wreck his brain' thing.) But after 20 years in the business he's finally "made it", and being openly gay would ruin that. It's not right or fair, but that's Hollywood.
"Blatantly denying it" is offensive to you? Too bad. You don't get to make any choices for him. It's his life. And how do you know any of these so-called in the closet celebs are actually gay?
"Blatantly denying it" is offensive to you? Too bad. You don't get to make any choices for him. It's his life. And how do you know any of these so-called in the closet celebs are actually gay?
Last edited:
Similar threads
