I've been troubled by a couple of recent Huff Post columns I read regarding celebrities, homosexuality, and privacy.
Not long ago, actor Tom Hardy, star of the soon-to-be-released film, Legend, was offended when being asked about his sexual orientation by a journalist. In response, Huff Post blogger Noah Michelson wrote a piece defending the journalist, saying, "There is nothing offensive about asking a public figure about his or her sexual orientation."
After Michelson received a great deal of criticism for his post, fellow Huff Post contributor, Michelangelo Signorile, defended his colleague, Noah Michelson, ending his article regarding the matter with the following paragraph:
"It's not the media's job to cover up for public figures. And it's certainly not the media's job to send the mixed message to young people that, though they can now get married in any state if they're gay, heterosexuality is glamorous and exciting -- and reportable -- but homosexuality is a dirty secret that should never be raised."
I think both of these writers are kind of missing the point, and in so doing, are coming across as quite immature. The central issue isn't the morality of homosexuality and the public's altering perception of it; it's privacy and being able to keep one's professional and personal lives separate, no matter how famous a person may be. Tom Hardy, in being offended, wasn't saying, "I think homosexuality is offensive;" he was saying, "I came here to talk about and promote my new movie and would like to keep my private life private."
Granted, pictures, interviews, cameras, and gossip kind of come with the territory of being a celebrity. However, regardless if a celebrity is gay or straight, why should they feel obligated to tell the world about their personal lives? If a heterosexual celebrity voluntarily tells the media of a new engagement, then so be it. But until that point, of what business is it ours? If a homosexual celebrity voluntarily comes out of the closet to the media, then again, so be it. But until that point, of what business is it ours?
Not only that, but these two writers seemed to insinuate that since same-sex marriage is now legal in this country, everyone is okay with it, so all gay men and lesbian women should declare their homosexuality to the world through the most powerful megaphone ever created. What they seem to fail to realize is that, while acceptance of the LGBT community is definitely growing, it still has a ways to go. Some parents will still disown their children if they come out as gay. Some friends and family members will stop associating themselves with a person if they come out. What if Tom Hardy is in fact gay but is uncertain how some family members will react, so he's kept it a secret? What if he's straight but simply wants to keep his romances to himself? In either scenario, of what business is it ours? If celebrities want to keep interviews professional, the media should do its part and act professionally as well.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/why-asking-is-not-outing-in-2015_b_8175944.html
Not long ago, actor Tom Hardy, star of the soon-to-be-released film, Legend, was offended when being asked about his sexual orientation by a journalist. In response, Huff Post blogger Noah Michelson wrote a piece defending the journalist, saying, "There is nothing offensive about asking a public figure about his or her sexual orientation."
After Michelson received a great deal of criticism for his post, fellow Huff Post contributor, Michelangelo Signorile, defended his colleague, Noah Michelson, ending his article regarding the matter with the following paragraph:
"It's not the media's job to cover up for public figures. And it's certainly not the media's job to send the mixed message to young people that, though they can now get married in any state if they're gay, heterosexuality is glamorous and exciting -- and reportable -- but homosexuality is a dirty secret that should never be raised."
I think both of these writers are kind of missing the point, and in so doing, are coming across as quite immature. The central issue isn't the morality of homosexuality and the public's altering perception of it; it's privacy and being able to keep one's professional and personal lives separate, no matter how famous a person may be. Tom Hardy, in being offended, wasn't saying, "I think homosexuality is offensive;" he was saying, "I came here to talk about and promote my new movie and would like to keep my private life private."
Granted, pictures, interviews, cameras, and gossip kind of come with the territory of being a celebrity. However, regardless if a celebrity is gay or straight, why should they feel obligated to tell the world about their personal lives? If a heterosexual celebrity voluntarily tells the media of a new engagement, then so be it. But until that point, of what business is it ours? If a homosexual celebrity voluntarily comes out of the closet to the media, then again, so be it. But until that point, of what business is it ours?
Not only that, but these two writers seemed to insinuate that since same-sex marriage is now legal in this country, everyone is okay with it, so all gay men and lesbian women should declare their homosexuality to the world through the most powerful megaphone ever created. What they seem to fail to realize is that, while acceptance of the LGBT community is definitely growing, it still has a ways to go. Some parents will still disown their children if they come out as gay. Some friends and family members will stop associating themselves with a person if they come out. What if Tom Hardy is in fact gay but is uncertain how some family members will react, so he's kept it a secret? What if he's straight but simply wants to keep his romances to himself? In either scenario, of what business is it ours? If celebrities want to keep interviews professional, the media should do its part and act professionally as well.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/why-asking-is-not-outing-in-2015_b_8175944.html
Comments
Post a Comment