What if you knew from firsthand knowledge that a liberal talk show host was gay

[ruggerson]

but he/she actively kept up the ruse on their show that they're straight.

Would this make you think less of this person's honesty and integrity?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. No.

Each person has their own reasons for facing the question of coming out in the way that they do. The only time it becomes a public issue is if that person, although GLBTI, is working against the rights and dignities of the community. Then they have opened themselves to being dragged involuntarily towards the light.

Just an opinion from a breeder, signifying little.

[gateley]

3. Agree --

It's nobody's business UNLESS, as Tandalayo_Scheisskopf says, that person works against GLBT rights. Larry Craig comes to mind.

[mitchtv]

10. I agree with You TS

sometimes even egg packers can get it right. We are talking earning a living here. Unless he's a phobe it is not my business.

[hulklogan]

2. There is no reason for a liberal talk show host to be in the closet at this point

so I would think less of his or her honesty and integrity. It would certainly make me wonder if anything else they talk about might be a lie.

[TomInTib]

4. But there is the issue of sponsor sensitivity. nt

[gateley]

6. Why do you feel a person HAS to come out?

I don't think we can judge another's reasons for any choice they make.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

9. because coming out is a huge part of gay identity. if we were all in the closet, would we

have a community or any rights or even any chances of any rights?

[gateley]

13. No, but I don't think peoples' individual reasons should be discounted.

You don't know why s/he has chosen not to come out.

In theory, I agree with you, but we're talking about individuals here.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

14. i can fairly assume that the individual doesnt want to risk his/her career

but i feel like too much sympathy is given to rich celebs who dont want a career risk. we all risk our careers and i think as much as we can we have an obligation to younger gay people to be out.

i dont think people just have individual obligation, i believe people have social obligations too,

as a gay person you have some obligation to the gay community

other people have suffered, for your right to NOT be in jail because of some sodomy law. you have a obligation to the next generation as well.

as i said earlier, i would NOT out this person, but i do think less of them.

[Zuiderelle]

26. You are SO right, lioness. We ALL risk our careers being out.

And we all make that choice. I used to sympathize with closeted celebrities who feared ruining their careers, but I don't anymore. Instead I see them as selfish "haves" who don't feel the real pain of inequality. What we lack without gay marriage is financial for the most part (aside from visitation rights, etc.), spousal health benefits, pension benefits, tax deductions, social security survivor benefits, inheritance rights. All those can be substituted by someone with wealth. And someone with great wealth would not even feel the pinch of it. Not like we do. They are skating on our backs.

[hulklogan]

25. I never said I think a person HAS to come out or even SHOULD come out

but if I knew they were hiding in the closet I would worry about their honesty and integrity in other issues.

[Creideiki]

17. We're a splintered tent

There are people that benefit from the liberal cause and consider themselves liberal when it comes to their own interests that have no desire to include others as beneficiaries.

The biggest example of that long-winded opaque sentence is the civil rights movement. There are people that, say, suffered from various criminal inequities who would continue to keep other people suffering from various criminal inequities (even join in the inequity). Yeah. I'm talking about the number of African Americans who want to maintain that gay people shouldn't have the same rights they do because they don't get to choose to be African American, but we, apparently, all do. :sarcasm:

[pnwmom]

28. What if the person is not gay, but bisexual, and has a wife and children?

Would it be dishonest and lacking integrity for that person not to come out as a gay person? Does the whole world have to know that either he's cheated on his wife, or the two of them have some understanding?

[Jamastiene]

50. There are cases where they may be in danger if they come out

even in liberal surroundings, there are sometimes pockets of conservatism that can cause the entire perspective to change.

[Snarkoleptic]

5. Was it your right or left hand?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

7. i wouldnt out them but i dont respected closeted celebreties at all.

yes, i understand there is a career risk. its exist for us all. but the luckier amongst us have an even bigger obligation to gay youngsters to be role models and to live life w.courage.

if i can do they, they can do it.

the only people i have sympathy for are people who are LESS fortunate than me

[bowens43]

8. No. It's none of our business.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. that would be true, if assumption of sexuality were neutral but its nto

people are assumed to be heterosexual, its not like no one know his sexual orientation now, they do. they are just wrong.

[enlightenment]

18. Assumption has everything to do with it -

I just wonder at what point of the GLBT community get to just live their lives.

Having a social responsibility, an obligation - how far do you take that? Many communities of people suffer abuses and inequalities, which, over time, are usually (hopefully) rectified. At what point can the GLBT community say, we don't have to live our sexual life in public in order to make the point that we should have the same rights as everyone else. The next generation? The one after that? Because you're saying that until some arbitrary line is crossed that all GLBT persons have to be their sexual preference FIRST - before any other consideration.

Otherwise, they can't be trusted.

My son is an almost fully transitioned FtM. He has moved from the city where he lived through the most obvious stages of his transition to another city where people will only know him as he is now - a man. He doesn't WANT to live as a "transgendered" person because that isn't how he identifies. He identifies as a man.

By your reasoning, he shouldn't be allowed to do that. He should have to - forevermore, presumably - tell everyone he meets that he wasn't born with a penis and a scrotum - that he was identified and raised as a female.

Why? To satisfy a perceived social obligation? And if he doesn't he's not trustworthy?

I'm sorry. I appreciate the sincerity of your belief, but I think it is incredibly narrow-minded.

Yes, I agree that perception is important and that those who came before did a great service in standing up for the rights of all. But to insist that everyone who identifies as something other than heterosexual has to be an activist is absurd, unrealistic, and really does more harm than good in the long-run. As long as ANY group continues to point out how different it is, it will fail to achieve what it presumably wants - to be treated "like everyone else." You can't be a persecuted minority and "just like everyone else" at the same time.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

20. i didnt say everyone had to. i said i respect those who do and have less respect for those who dont

sorry but i get to choose my standards for deserving respect and i am not asking for legislating my standards.

also your son doesnt identify as transgendered/genderqueer and therefore is really free from the bonds of glbt social obligation, isnt he?

i am sorry that you find me narrow minded. i find your idea that your individual needs in all cases trumps social obligation, selfish and self centered.

also straight people are out. whether by assumption or my flaunting their sexual orientation. asking a gay person come out is asking them to live like everyone else. any mention of wife/gf by a man is outing themselves. just because its harder to do it as a gay person, doesnt mean in this country, it cant or shouldnt be done.

[enlightenment]

45. Umm - not really.

What you said was:

"i wouldnt out them but i dont respected closeted celebreties at all.

yes, i understand there is a career risk. its exist for us all. but the luckier amongst us have an even bigger obligation to gay youngsters to be role models and to live life w.courage.

if i can do they, they can do it.

the only people i have sympathy for are people who are LESS fortunate than me"

The presumption of that statement is that you believe that gay people SHOULD wear their sexual identity on their shoulders - because they have an "obligation to gay youngsters to be role models . . ."


Your rationale that "straight people are out" is absurd. It relies on whether or not they are involved in a relationship that presumably indicates their preference. Firstly, you might want to check with the Bi community and ask them if they consider themselves "straight" when they date/have sex with someone of the opposite gender and "gay" when they date/have sex with someone of the same gender. Oddly enough, I suspect that's why they identify as BI-sexual.

Secondly, how about all those straight people who aren't in a relationship? How on earth do you identify them - because by your rationale, they're not OUT. They're in the closet. They're just people, living their lives. Which they have a right to do, just like anyone else - including gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people.

You have to, by your own admission, go back to assumption in order to make the call. You have to ASSUME someone's sexual orientation. Frankly, I have better things to do with my day than to wonder about how the person who is serving my coffee or reading the news identifies. I don't spend every moment of my day worrying about other people's sexual identity. If they CHOOSE to make it public, so be it - that's there choice. I have no less respect for them if they don't.

I will agree with you - respect is earned. If you don't feel that people who choose not to live their private lives in public are deserving of respect, that's your call. I won't gainsay you that. But don't expect me to respect an opinion that is so narrowly formed.

You "excused" my son with a decision that is in direct contradiction to your repeatedly stated reasoning. He has no 'obligation' because he chooses not to identify as transgendered/genderqueer. Following that reasoning to it's logical conclusion, how can you condemn ANYONE who chooses not to identify as gay? If it's their choice, it's their choice - period. You can't pick and choose.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

52. i think you just are looking for reasons for your son to be closeted about

his transgender identity.

he can just be a man, i just dont respect him as much as i do transgendered people who help the next generation by being out.

also gender and sexual orientation outness are very different so i dont know why you confuse one w.the other

yes, straight are out. not just those in relationships but otherwise too. since an assumption of straightness occurs by default straight people live honest lives about their sexual orientation.

i dont expect you to respect me nor do i respect someone who thinks being closeted for celebs is perfectly ok lifestyle choice

[annabanana]

12. 100% their own business and 0% of mine. . . . . n/t

[rocktivity]

15. Depending your the nature of your "firsthand knowledge"

Maybe you can discuss it with him or her.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Musty]

16. Who freakin' cares!

It's his/her business.

[closeupready]

19. Yes. I actually once dated a news anchor when I was in college.

He, however, had come out and had divorced his wife. I just have no time or respect for people whose lives amount essentially to lies.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

21. exactly. not respecting someone who lives a lie is a very legitimate point

[closeupready]

23. yes absolutely.

n/t

[closeupready]

22. Also, I agree with lionness, no respect, but I wouldn't out them just for that facade.

wanted to add that.

[poebango]

24. Straight away

I've been wanting to come out of the closet and finally tell people that I'm straight. But I'll do it in my own time and my own way.;)

[pnwmom]

27. I would wonder about his family. Does he have a wife? Children?

If he did, he has an extra set of complications in any decision to come out.

[ruggerson]

30. No, in this case

the individual has had a longtime, same sex partner.

[pnwmom]

32. Then, in that case, I would think

it was sad.

But I wouldn't question the person's honesty or integrity -- I think it's more a matter of self-esteem. It's not easy for a lot of people to come out. It requires courage, even now.

[ruggerson]

29. I'm not dicussing "outing" them

I'm just asking if you knew for a fact that they were actively pretending to be straight on their show, and the reality was they were not, would it affect how you feel about their integriy.

IMHO, lying about who you are and deliberately pretending to be someone you're not, when you're on the air discussing politics for hours every day (including gay issues), means you do not respect your listeners very much.

[Zuiderelle]

31. I completely agree. It makes them dishonest.

[dsc]

33. I do think there is a difference between lying and refusing to come out

I do find the lying disturbing but would cut him some slack for refusing to come out especially if his partner didn't want to.

[ruggerson]

34. I don't mind a non public, non political individual doing this

after all, people have every right to make their own choices about coming out.

But, if someone is a liberal public figure, replete with the megaphone that talk radio gives you, and their show is ABOUT politics, I think it really says volumes about their integrity.

[Fearless]

35. Do you know what's sad?

I've been reading some of the posts here so far. That's what's sad.

Each and every one of you at some point in your life was "in the closet". And, regardless of for how long or to whom that was, I seriously doubt you would have liked being outed even to your friends or family. Perhaps your fear was unfounded, that they accepted you with open arms, I'm happy for you if they did, and maybe they didn't and you lost a few people along the way, and I'm sorry if that was the case, but the fact remains that you would not have liked it if someone had done to you what many of you seem to want to do to this hypothetical closeted celebrity.

Every person must first come to terms with themselves, feel comfortable with who they are, feel safe, and then step out into the sunlight. Will they be happier once they did, undoubtedly. But if they were not able to find themselves first and had sunlight thrust upon them, who knows how that could affect them. Maybe they'll be fine. Maybe they'll kill themselves. Maybe something in between. The fact of the matter is that no one has the right to out someone else who is doing no harm.

Emotional maturity knows no physical age; some will be ready before others. But to drop them into daylight before they've fully understood themselves is tantamount to a certain principle outing two of her students this past week.

We mustn't forget that the GLBTQ movement isn't about the group just like the NAACP or ACLU isn't about the group, it's about the members therein and what together can be accomplished for them individually. We cannot rush people along the path to emotional and sexual maturity for fear of disenfranchisement in the very least, which itself would damage the movement both in its membership and it's credibility, or blatant hatred or denial thereof like so many of our repressed Rethuglican counterparts.

NTF

[dsc]

38. I think most people

are more upset at the pretending to be straight, which I am taking to mean making up girlfriends on air, than simply not being out. I do think that is a problem.

[Fearless]

41. I think that sort of thing comes down to comfortability...

I don't know about the celeb life, but I know about my own. I'll try an example from my own life... A couple of years back, before I was out, I had kept a poster on my wall. It was a bunch of naked women, nothing that graphic, lots of arms and legs in the right places if you get the drift. At that point I didn't understand myself, at least not as well as I think I do now. It's not that I actively wanted to deny GLBTQ issues or my feelings or anything like that and I didn't have anything against gay people. I was just confused. I didn't understand that other people felt the same way, that it meant something or that it led to something. So I put that poster up. It was a sort of shield. That way, if someone asked me why I wasn't dating anyone or something along those lines, I had a means to deflect the root of the issue because I did not yet understand what that meant.

Of course, I like so many others, eventually began to understand what I was feeling. I accepted myself. And soon after, I felt good about myself; I felt confident about what I was, perhaps for the first time in 5-6 years. I took the poster down and if someone asked me why I wasn't dating the opposite sex, I'd tell them. It just came down to me understanding, internally, that it was more important for me to feel good about myself than to have the friendship of someone who expected me to be someone who I wasn't. The story's turned out pretty good for me, because I was able to do it on my terms. I still have the poster too, but it's tucked away, something to laugh at when I need a good chuckle.

My point is that we cannot expect everyone to be up front and honest about themselves until they feel good enough, confident enough, to do so. I suspect that goes for celebrities too. If not more so. I cannot think of an industry that is more dependant on one's image than that, perhaps rap music. Sometimes we forget the work that went into getting us to where we are and too the conditions that have them still closeted. That said, I'm sure you could guess, I don't believe that anyone should be labeled as dishonest or disingenuous because they haven't yet matured enough to know what they're doing.

NTF

Edit: Spelling, rambling.

[dsc]

48. that is fair

and yes I was there too, and also made up girlfriends and the like. Without actually knowing what this particular person does I can't say what I would or wouldn't really think. I can see some merit to both sides here. I will say outing him would be out of the question.

[ruggerson]

40. This thread isn't about outing

[Fearless]

42. The thread isn't, but some people brought it up.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

54. yeah i brought it up to say one should NOT out them. nt

[Fearless]

55. .

:applause:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

53. no one is talking about outing. just about integrity and respect. nt

[Zuiderelle]

57. Who's talking about outing? I have more respect for someone out than in, especially if that someone

has known they are gay for a very long time. I think it's too dire a time for anyone to reject the importance of our civil rights by staying in the closet, so I respect more those people who risk their careers to get out of it. That doesn't mean I think anyone should be forcibly outed, but I don't have any issue with my own level of respect between a closeted gay celebrity and an open one. I respect the latter infinitely more. The former, can gain my respect whenever they want. When they finally make that leap out of comfort and into risk and honor.

[hulklogan]

36. It's amazing how so many people assumed the OP was talking about "outing"

when in fact it has nothing to do with outing at all. :eyes:

[Fearless]

37. ...

:rofl:

There're been bigger jumps I'm sure... check out the GD-P.

[Fearless]

39. I have an honest question...

Do I lack integrity if I'm walking down the street holding hand with a woman? Or laughing at her jokes? Or eating dinner with her? If I go out to a movie with her and someone mistakes us as a couple, am I a bad person for "leading them on"?

[ruggerson]

43. You don't have a national radio show and discuss political issues every day

[Fearless]

44. Is this apparently not so hypothetical person...

coming out against GLBTQ issues? For them? Indifferent?

If they're supporting them, in actuality they may be helping more by acting straight. It's the idea that we have public allies, which may be a defining factor in gaining equal rights.

[ruggerson]

46. They are liberal, they support GLBT issues

it's the dishonesty that bothers me. It makes me wonder what else they are dishonest about.

[Fearless]

47. Well if they support GLBTQ issues then I really don't see a problem.

Maybe there is a benefit in the grand scheme. Maybe if heterosexual (so-called *ahem* "normal") people see this person who they would see as "clearly straight" support GLBTQ issues then maybe they will too.

Otherwise, I don't have any other argument as to the benefit. I've said before that maybe they don't feel comfortable with themselves yet. Emotional maturity knows no age. Some are emotionally mature earlier some later. I think perhaps the expectation coming along with the limelight could exasperate this. I don't know. There are so many mitigating factors that I don't want to cookie cutter any one situation.

The only consolation that I can give is to say that this isn't really dishonesty. Dishonesty necessitates intentful lying not protective lying. Intentful lying would be telling your nephew that there isn't any cake left so that you can have the last piece. While, protective lying would be more like telling them there isn't any cake left because they're diabetic and you don't want them to feel bad. In this case, though it's hard to know for sure without knowing the person in question, it seems like they are trying to protect themselves more than they are trying to use heterosexuality for personal gain. At least that's what I hope it is. Then again I prefer to look for the good in people. If they support GLBTQ issues, then I see the good and the rest doesn't really matter to me.

[Jamastiene]

49. No, for me personally, I wouldn't think any less of them.

My $.02:
Different people are in different stages of self acceptance. They may not be ready to come out or may be in a situation (in the entertainment industry) where they are advised to keep it hush hush.

My personal opinion under those circumstances is that I wouldn't think any less of them at all.

If they were spewing homophobic tripe, I would have to rethink the situation and it definitely wouldn't be favorable.

[Moloch]

51. No...

I think they will come out when they're ready.. but if they aren't actively working against the gay community (ie Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Ted Haggard etc. etc.) then there's really no purpose in outing them.

[closeupready]

56. Well we all agree that absent homophobic statements, he/she shouldn't be outed.

But this discussion is interesting to me because it's apparent that we have no uniform definition of "gay".

Funny about the poster on the wall - dsc did it, too, as did I. :D Now I look back on that, though, and I resent ALL of it - ALL the lies which I felt I had to tell, all the posters on the wall, all the dates I set up that I didn't have any desire to go on, the stories I lied about. :mad: I don't know if I will ever "get over it" - if I haven't at this point, I probably never will.

And I suppose this is the big reason I take all GLBT issues dead seriously.