 by Lyle Masaki
Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Who's onlineThere are currently 47 members and 1920 guests online.
|
"Out" Power 50 Glass Closet Tour makes examples of Anderson Cooper, Matt Drudge and Barry Diller
Two years ago Out magazine got additional attention for its Power 50 list (which names the most influential gay men and women in America) by outing a handfull of celebrities in order to discuss "The Glass Closet", celebrities who aren't out to the public but whose sexual orientation is seen as an open secret that the media mostly ignores. This year's Power 50 revisits the issue by including three men who aren't openly gay — Anderson Cooper, Matt Drudge and Barry Diller — on the list. Out editor-in-chief Aaron Hicklin discussed the ethics of Out's outings in the UK paper The Guardian and defended the article by noting that four of the celebrities mentioned in the original "Glass Closet" article (Jodie Foster, David Hyde Pierce, Clay Aiken and Wanda Sykes) have publicly come out since then, helping push the closet towards obsolescence. Out's 2007 "Glass Closet" issue But is there a difference between the kind of outing that gossip mongers like Perez Hilton (who dropped from 16th to 43rd on this year's Power 50) practice and the way Out peers into the glass closet? I find Drudge to be an interesting addition to the Power 50 list because, unlike other residents of the Glass Closet, Drudge has denied that he's gay. Repeatedly. Drudge has been outed by the likes of Michelanelo Signorile, Alec Baldwin and former conservative media attack dog David Brock (who hilariously turned out to have kept the sexually-explicit fax Drudge sent him in case anyone tried to challenge his story). The other residents of the Glass Closet stay closeted by avoiding the topic, often with the help of reporters who won't ask the uncomfortable questions. The utterly adorkable David Brock with Jon Stewart Drudge is also notable as someone who uses his influence to help anti-gay forces to obtain and retain power. That certainly brings to mind the original purpose of outing, which focused on closeted gays who were hurting LGBT people in their work. So does that make it more acceptable for Out to try forcing celebrities out of the Glass Closet than when someone like Perez Hilton declares a celebrity gay and starts drawing penises on their faces in photos? At the least, Out is trying to justify itself by framing it within the politics of being openly gay, but is that just an excuse to dish about who's got secrets? Let us know what you think in the poll below and in the comments! Submitted by on Mon, 2009-04-06 14:20. |
 Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
sick of this crap...
"So does that make it more acceptable for Out to try forcing celebrities out of the Glass Closet than when someone like Perez Hilton declares a celebrity gay and starts drawing penises on their faces in photos?"
^ i am gonna say NO.
does anyone that is gay like being forced out? i don't think so. it's as simple as that.
i don't care who you are, i don't care what the reasons are...at the end of the day, we all are people and want privacy and want to live our lives the way we want.
if certain people want to be closeted, then let them. they're not hurting anyone. there are plenty of out celebrities now and there will be plenty that aren't.
i just don't get the forcible outing crap. it's nobody's business. people need to get a life and find better ways to spend their time.
The closet is harmful
"So does that make it more acceptable for Out to try forcing celebrities out of the Glass Closet than when someone like Perez Hilton declares a celebrity gay and starts drawing penises on their faces in photos?"
^ i am gonna say NO.
does anyone that is gay like being forced out? i don't think so. it's as simple as that.
i don't care who you are, i don't care what the reasons are...at the end of the day, we all are people and want privacy and want to live our lives the way we want.
if certain people want to be closeted, then let them. they're not hurting anyone. there are plenty of out celebrities now and there will be plenty that aren't.
i just don't get the forcible outing crap. it's nobody's business. people need to get a life and find better ways to spend their time.
Liz, I beg to differ. The days of the closet are over. Coming out opens people's eyes. We need every gay face visible and honest. Would you also think it's acceptable for a black person to hide their race if they could?
There is no shame in being gay. The closet is what furthers the stigma that there is something to hide or be ashamed of.
The closet does hurt people. It forces people to live half lives and lie to people.
"Passing"
Liz, I beg to differ. The days of the closet are over. Coming out opens people's eyes. We need every gay face visible and honest. Would you also think it's acceptable for a black person to hide their race if they could?
Acceptable? No.
Their right to do so? Absolutely.
Personal privacy and freedom of choice (and that includes making choices you, me or the man in the moon don't approve of) are cornerstones of a civilized society.
over?
i don't think the days of the closet are over. if that was the case, then this discussion would not be happening.
i realize coming out opens people's eyes and helps acceptance, etc.
BUT....as i said before, i feel there are plenty of people who are out who are good 'role models' for the community (ellen, NPH, john barrowman) and there will be people who aren't out. eh, it sort of balances out.
you said "There is no shame in being gay" - - of course i agree, but not everyone feels that way. lots of people get fired for it, discharged from the military because of it, beat up, or killed because of it. so, yes....in a weird, sick way, there is shame out there for people because they are gay. they themselves may not feel ashamed, but others do and can make them feel that way
same with showbiz, etc. some can't get work after being out, some are typecasted.
all that said, i know times are changing, and acceptance is better, but at the same time, we can't deny there are still roadblocks as a result of being openly out.
I tend to agree
with you Liz. And, at the end of the day, some people just like to have their privacy, It's not necessarily about being ashamed of being gay, it's just that they don't feel the need to tell the world about their personal lives. It is easy to say that people in the media have an opportunity to change peoples perceptions about gays and lesbians...which they do, but at the end of the day the people who work in the media are still regular people who have regular private lives beyond the television.
anyway that's just my two cents.
Outing versus Reporting
I don't think it is the media's job to protect actors or celebrities "secret gay identities".
How is that objective journalism? How is that not playing into the gay = bad belief of homophobes? Let the straight publications play that game. I expect better from gay publications. Period.
I have never understood why we as a gay community continue to act like someone being gay is some dirty secret that mustn't be revealed until the celebrity in question offically "comes out" in a newspaper or magazine.
Seriously, Adam Lambert? We had questions about Adam Lambert?!
But I would be particularly disturbed if magazines like The Advocate and Out were to be complicit in someone being closeted and profiled in their magazines.
If it's true that they are gay then that's all that matters.
If someone's walking around town with their boyfriend or having committment ceremonies that they talk about in "certain" circles or going to gay clubs and making out with their boyfriend, that's not being closeted. That's being OUT.
I don't think folks should use a celebrity's sexuality as a weapon but I also just don't get why we tolerate the "open secret" crap. It is either a secret or it's not.
Jodie Foster was out. She was openly with her girlfriend for 14 years. We saw them together with their children, we knew her name. Jodie Foster even talked about her. Where's the secret?
I find it strange that here on A.E. writers have no trouble mentioning any number of personal sexual tidbits (like Jude Law sleeping with his ex- nanny) without so much as a blink but fall over backwards not to mention that someone is gay when we KNOW that they are (whether they have told People Magazine or not.
After "publically" coming out, a lot of these celebrities will say "Well, I was out in my private life and all my collegues knew so it was never a secret..." (NPH, Luke M, Wanda, David Hyde Pierce, Clay Aiken, George Michael)
So how is that not being out?
Kudos to Out Magazine for calling a spade a spade.
Celebrities (more so than my local bagel shop owner) have a responsbility to not act like being gay is some horrible secret that must be skirted over and avoided least the fall into unfavor with the masses.
But more importantly, gay journalist have got to get beyond this mentality that dictates that we "protect" people's closets. If someone doesn't want anyone to know that they are gay, then they need to hide it better or don't become a celebrity.
In 2009 there are plenty of out gay and lesbian actors, anchors, filmmakers, directors, producers, etc who just go about their business and aren't worried about who knows or doesn't know that they are gay and they don't deny it or talk about it non-stop.
There is just no excuse any longer for being a closeted celebrity other than cowardice.
It would be nice if a person's sexuality didn't matter. It does. Period. There is not getting around it.
This is the world we live in. Being gay is no more "personal" than being a natural red head and should be treated as such.
Just because these folks are celebrities, doesn't mean they should get to sit back and quietly benefit from the accomplishments of gay civil rights activism without standing up to be counted.
Frankly, I'm tired of this "open secret" madness.
"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)
Here Here
I personally think Perez gets picked on a bit too much (though I'm sure he enjoys it). Yes hes shameless and trashy but hes an equal opportunity offender. If he knows two people are dating, any two people be they gay straight or whatever, he puts it on the information on his site. And yes, then he draws penises on them.
To report about Lindsay Lohan's "secret" boyfriends but not her "secret" girlfriend would be hypocritical of him. Don't you think?
These are not "private"
Not Utopia Yet
I believe that if the
I believe that if the celebrity lives an otherwise out life, it's okay to comment on it.
If they do not, or have stated they are NOT gay, then they are entitled to that privacy, even if we all know it's a big fat lie.
However, public officials or non-celebrities like Matt Drudge, who actively seek to subvert the rights of others are fair game, IMHO. The old adage "don't start none, won't be none" seems to apply.
Matt Drudge
Mo' Matt
Matt Drudge and gay motorcycle gang
The only time I encountered The Drudge Report was shortly after the Columbine massacre - the day of, the day after - Matt posted an item supposedly written by a gay biker gang alleging that Columbine was some kind of OK Corral of armed gays vs. straights and that gay men everywhere should take up guns and join them.
After 10 years I still have not forgotten that hilarious post, which I was able to see through even as a teenager. I wish I'd saved it, but this was the pre-blog, pre-social networking era.
As far as I know Drudge was the only person to report this little news item. Now I know he'd probably gotten it off some gay biker fetish site.
Just thought I'd share ;-)
Double standard
Why is Perez Hilton a "gossip monger" for outing people, yet when David Brock outs someone, he is "utterly adorkable" for "hilariously [having] kept the sexually-explicit fax Drudge sent him in case anyone tried to challenge his story"?
For one thing...
...it does matter what they're doing when they out people. Perez Hilton writes a gossip blog and is, thus, a gossip columnist (or gossip monger, as I used to indicate that people see what Perez does is lesser than what Out magazine does). Brock, meanwhile, discussed dating Drudge in a memoir about being a gay man mixed in the conservative movement; discussing his encounters other gay men in that movement wasn't just about dropping scandalous claims but relevant to drawing a portrait of the world he was living in, as was discussion of how people like Laura Ingraham and Arianna Huffington treated him.
As for being utterly adorkable, it's because I find him crushworthy.
Take a step back...
...and you'll see that Perez, Out magazine and Brock all have one thing in common -- they're all trying to sell something. Brock knew his story about Drudge would sell books and was worth money. I don't believe he -- "hilariously" -- kept Drudge's fax strictly for scrapbooking purposes.
Beyond selling something, I agree that their motives do part ways. But to the person being outed, I bet the purity of the intentions of the person doing the outing aren't of much importance. The end result is the same.
For the record, I'm not defending or approving of any of these guys. All I'm saying is that I believe they're more alike than some would like to think.
Double Standard
I think it's fair game. Straight celebrities such as Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Tom Cruise, Paris Hilton, Alec Baldwin, Jake Gyllenhaal, Britney Spears etc have their private life splash across magazine and TV without their consent, and in some instances it could have ruin their career like Britney Spears. Everything in their life is reported on like their love life (cheating), family (kids), marriage, divorce, child custody cases etc...
I don't see anyone standing up straight celebrities' right to privacy. Why is it gay celebrities is given special treatment? This is the price of fame even when you don't want it. "It comes with the job"
The REAL elephant
Now before I launch into this comment, let me preface by saying: Don't let me be misundertood or hypocritical. I'll be the first to admit that, on occasion, I've been bitten by the temptation bug and picked up a gossip mag and gawked at some of the pointless revelations about some celebrities. So I understand the draw. But I always came away from the experience feeling I had somehow diminished myself for doing so. Like I had done something that couldn't be taken back.
It's true that we do hover over the private lives of celebrities to gain a sense of superiority about ourselves. But what does this say about us? Not much. (And what it does say isn't very flattering.) More often than not, I find myself wanting to shout at my fellow human beings, "THIS IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF ENERGY. INSTEAD OF SPENDING TIME BEING ENVIOUS OF WHAT THEY HAVE (which, let's be honest, is exactly what we're doing), WHY DON'T WE POOL OUR RESOURCES AROUND BEING STARS OURSELVES?
This is what needs to be said, but no one is saying it. Gay, straight, bi, omni, whatever...in the grand scheme of the Universe, this whole exercise of getting invested in, and throwing our two cents into, the personal lives of people we will probably never meet exposes each and every single one of us for the craven, cowardly little busybodies we truly are. (See? Told you it wasn't flattering.)
Does it come with their job? Yes. Should it? Absolutely not. And the fact that it does makes it that much more insidious. And let's not fool ourselves into thinking the people who report on these unfortunate shenanigans are doing an altruistic public service. I remember when I was a kid, one early paparazzo actually said, on the record and on camera, "I have no respect for anyone who makes more than a million dollars a year." (Well..at least he was honest with himself. It was all about him.) These people have no class and no shame and are simply making excuses for their own parasitic behavior. (If you've ever caught TMZ, you know what I mean. If you haven't, consider yourself blessed. Watched it once, and after 15 minutes, I felt like I needed to take a long, scalding shower. Blecch.) I follow the WORK of public artists/stars/celebrities much more than I follow their personal life because I put myself in their shoes. Would I want the other crabs in the barrel trying to pull me back down because they're too self-absorbed in their own misery to join me in a bid for freedom? Um, no. So what gives me the right to do unto them what I wouldn't want done to me? Not a damn thing.
Yes, it's true that if we're going to gawk at the love lives of people more oriented toward a different gender, same-gender-oriented people should get the same treatment. It won't stop mattering until we stop treating it like it does by hiding. When it comes to reporting on matters of any public figure's love life, it's an all-or-no-one proposition.
But frankly...IT SHOULD BE NO-ONE.
Still a difference
Out isn't doing a piece on public gay people in power, they're doing a piece on gay people in power. They would be remiss if they weren't talking about gay people who weild power without being out. Is their power inauthentic because they're not out? Perhaps, but perhaps not. We can't make that decision unless we know in whose closet sits thrones.
I would say Matt Drudge is entirely inauthentic in that he supports and abets those who working against his best interests as a gay man. Or he's just a douche.
Anderson Cooper, on the other hand, appears to be working too hard to remain "objective" while his colleagues in the media line up on the various sides of the culture wars. I don't think his being in the closet is any more inauthentic than is his studied and calm demeanor in the face of titanic forces at war in our society (that was just an entirely too florid way of saying, while I think his sexuality is irrelevant to this power, I still support examining his career through the lens of the closet).
Perez Hilton, on the other hand, is merely playing an extended game of "guess who sucks dick." I'm sure I would have enjoyed that game in highschool had we engaged in it where I went (I'm not saying no one sucked dick (though, tragically I neither sucked nor was sucked), but that we didn't talk about it at the lunch table). There isn't really any journalistic value in his outings or even relevant social commentary.
That and he's an annoying twit media whore. At least I don't have to deal with the editors of Out magazine on television.
Anderson Cooper is perfectly
The Closet
Yes it's ok to be in the closet if you have a legitimate reason. ie being in the military ( I know I was the whole time I was in.. I wanted my retirement so I was very careful).
However if you are in a position that makes statesments against what you are then I'm all for outing hypocracy.
For those that think it's no ones business that is exactly right. So no matter how much we want Anderson or others to come out their right to be who they are trumps our curiosity... unless as I said above they come out as anti gay.
The day we stop stereotyping people perhaps outing someone
The day we stop stereotyping people perhaps outing someone
Blah blah blah
Jeanette Walls outed Drudge EONS ago
in her book Dish. According to his ex-boyfriends Drudge likes to have sex fully clohted in the shower while eating cake and having raw eggs smashed over his head.
No, I am not making this up.
Outing ANYONE
We make a lot of bruhaha about outing celebrities. But, the real issue here is outing ANYONE for any reason. All this is up to the individual to out themselves or not. Outing someone can have incredibly disastrous results, up to and including suicide. We may pretend among our gayselves that things are different now and we are a more modern society, but we are not. A friend of mine got slapped, in a store he works in, IN HOLLYWOOD, FER CRYIN OUT LOUD, because he acts gay. That is all. He wasn't doing anything. He was talking to a fellow employee, and the customer, a total stranger, a creep, decided he was in charge of public morality and took matters into his own hands. Unfortunately, there are too many people whose parents let them grow up with this kind of misguided hostility. So, some third person telling the world another person is gay can have extremely deleterious results such as Matthew Shephard suffered.
It also must be considered that our private attitudes and philosophies CAN and DO affect our business lives. These days, if someone becomes known for using the goods of overseas companies that abuse the civil rights of their employees, many customers boycott them and sales suffer. In fartoo many cases, this is precisely what happens to celebrities that come out. It is changing, but not very quickly. Some hack in here said, (and I am quoting here) "In 2009 there are plenty of out gay and lesbian actors"... Please, someone give this wretch a dictionary so they can define the word 'plenty' a bit better. There aren't plenty. There is almost an amount that equals the word 'few'. People that think sexuality has no effect on casting have not spent ten minutes in the business. If they had, they would know the prejudice exists and rules BFORE the actor (etc) ever gets the chance to vie for the role or the job.
We all must think about what country this is. This is the country of equals and the country of religious and philosophical freedom. That means nobody gets to choose for me when and how I will share personal details about my life. Nobody has to right to come up to you and demand to know what your religion is, how you vote, what clubs you belong to and a host of other personal details.
In closing, it is my belief that any gay that demands the right to out another gay is participating in gay bashing. That person is obviously ashamed of themselves and is looking for more miserable people to keep him or her company. Too bad. Get another hobby, bunky.
Oh Prunella!
"In closing, it is my belief that any gay that demands the right to out another gay is participating in gay bashing."
Honey, I can smell it from it here. My advice? GROW A PAIR!!!!!!!!
Wait...
Since when is Barry Diller
Grow A Pair!! Dummies for outing the closeted!!
That's right, I've been there done that, so save yourself from the agony of hiding. My experiences were one and all. I guarantee by the end of the book you will grow a pair so large that you can't see beyond your tummy. Best of all you can feel so self-righteous about it. Aurthur by Wrinkle Sac.
"If you take a suppository maybe you can stop the verbal diarrhea."