Comments on: shame on you Out magazine http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/ Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:07:41 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: duane http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6601 duane Tue, 10 Apr 2007 19:47:55 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6601 <blockquote>since no one was outed</blockquote> Here's where you are missing the point. Anderson Cooper and Jodie Foster are not out to the public, and are not out as public figures. They are out to their lovers and friends, but they technically have not come out officially, and Out magazine "outed" them, which is something they have obviously chosen to avoid. That is the point here, not the facts of whether or not they are or gay, but the fact that they have made the choice not to be out publicly, and Out magazine did it for them, without their permission. Being gay is one thing, being out is something else. Just because you are gay, and are seen in gay clubs, doesn't mean that you are truly 100% out. In their case, they obviously were not out in the media, and it should be their choice to publicly come out, if they so chose to. Until then, it is just speculation (whether or not it is true).

since no one was outed

Here’s where you are missing the point. Anderson Cooper and Jodie Foster are not out to the public, and are not out as public figures. They are out to their lovers and friends, but they technically have not come out officially, and Out magazine “outed” them, which is something they have obviously chosen to avoid. That is the point here, not the facts of whether or not they are or gay, but the fact that they have made the choice not to be out publicly, and Out magazine did it for them, without their permission.

Being gay is one thing, being out is something else. Just because you are gay, and are seen in gay clubs, doesn’t mean that you are truly 100% out. In their case, they obviously were not out in the media, and it should be their choice to publicly come out, if they so chose to. Until then, it is just speculation (whether or not it is true).

]]> By: Johnny http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6600 Johnny Tue, 10 Apr 2007 19:42:07 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6600 I accept the idea that people approach "outing" differently, but it's kind of a false argument in this case--since no one was outed. This is just reporting, and an essay about high profile people who are irrefutably gay, and the ways in which they sidestep the question when asked by reporters. The logical next step (if all the people who say "shame on Out magazine") have their way, is for Out to only report on people who agree to be reported on. That's not journalism, that's reprinting press releases. I accept the idea that people approach “outing” differently, but it’s kind of a false argument in this case–since no one was outed. This is just reporting, and an essay about high profile people who are irrefutably gay, and the ways in which they sidestep the question when asked by reporters. The logical next step (if all the people who say “shame on Out magazine”) have their way, is for Out to only report on people who agree to be reported on. That’s not journalism, that’s reprinting press releases.

]]> By: duane http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6561 duane Mon, 09 Apr 2007 20:12:10 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6561 While I do agree, I just expect better from Out. I mean, this is gays ganging up on gays here. That's why I am all up in arms about it. I think that Out should have taken the high road, and they didn't. Sure, they may not really care, but I don't see how personalizing the outing experience lessens the argument at all; in fact, I would think if anything, it would strengthen it. While I do agree, I just expect better from Out. I mean, this is gays ganging up on gays here. That’s why I am all up in arms about it. I think that Out should have taken the high road, and they didn’t.

Sure, they may not really care, but I don’t see how personalizing the outing experience lessens the argument at all; in fact, I would think if anything, it would strengthen it.

]]> By: Johnny http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6559 Johnny Mon, 09 Apr 2007 20:08:10 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6559 Being out is a personal decision for you and me--private individuals who don't trade on their personal lives to achieve celebrity. That's certainly not the case with Anderson Cooper. In fact, Cooper was at a gay bar in Chelsea just the other night. He's obviously not too concerned over this. I think it's very telling that people who are up in arms about this are talking about their own feelings: "How would I feel if I were outed?" That's beside the point. There are different rules for people who seek celebrity, and none of them should feel shocked with details of their open private lives is made public. Besides, Musto didn't out these people. They were outed years ago. And yes, in print. Being out is a personal decision for you and me–private individuals who don’t trade on their personal lives to achieve celebrity. That’s certainly not the case with Anderson Cooper. In fact, Cooper was at a gay bar in Chelsea just the other night. He’s obviously not too concerned over this. I think it’s very telling that people who are up in arms about this are talking about their own feelings: “How would I feel if I were outed?” That’s beside the point. There are different rules for people who seek celebrity, and none of them should feel shocked with details of their open private lives is made public. Besides, Musto didn’t out these people. They were outed years ago. And yes, in print.

]]> By: duane http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6555 duane Mon, 09 Apr 2007 19:27:05 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6555 <blockquote>To call the cover shameful is to insist that there is something shameful about being gay. </blockquote> At best, that is a huge stretch. Outing someone without their permission is very hurtful and denigrating, especially in a society that does not widely accept homosexuality. While I get your point about suggesting that being gay is "wrong" being associated with being outed as wrong, I wholeheartedly disagree with this action. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being gay, but being gay is who you are. It is a personal fact about you, and it is something that is up to you to share with the world. It is not the place of anyone to call you out of the closet, and splatter your sexuality all over the front page. Doing what Out magazine did is unconscionable, and goes beyond "just reporting". If you don't see it that way, that is fine, but that does not remove the feeling of disgust that many gay people share with me towards Out magazine, on this subject. Being out is a very personal action, and it isn't right, especially coming from a gay publication, of the media to take that action for you.

To call the cover shameful is to insist that there is something shameful about being gay.

At best, that is a huge stretch. Outing someone without their permission is very hurtful and denigrating, especially in a society that does not widely accept homosexuality. While I get your point about suggesting that being gay is “wrong” being associated with being outed as wrong, I wholeheartedly disagree with this action.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being gay, but being gay is who you are. It is a personal fact about you, and it is something that is up to you to share with the world. It is not the place of anyone to call you out of the closet, and splatter your sexuality all over the front page. Doing what Out magazine did is unconscionable, and goes beyond “just reporting”. If you don’t see it that way, that is fine, but that does not remove the feeling of disgust that many gay people share with me towards Out magazine, on this subject. Being out is a very personal action, and it isn’t right, especially coming from a gay publication, of the media to take that action for you.

]]> By: Johnny http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6552 Johnny Mon, 09 Apr 2007 18:55:19 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6552 Like him or not, Musto is a reporter and has been for a very long time, and he knows these people are gay. Other reporters do as well but have not reported it. To call the cover shameful is to insist that there is something shameful about being gay. There's nothing shameful, in my opinion, about being gay, therefore, there's nothing shameful about accurate reporting about gay celebrities. Who cares if they've said so in press releases? This is simply accurate reporting. (Anyone who balks at that should actually READ the article on out.com.) Would anyone balk at the reporting on Lindsay Lohan's latest boyfirend? Hardly. So why get your panties in a twist over this? Moreover, these people are celebrities, and actively seek public attention. Anyone who fusses over this should immediately and forever resist reading US, People, and any other magazine that reports on the personal lives of celebrities. You can't have it both ways: Celebrity reporting is bad--whether gay or straight—or it's OK. Beyond that, Musto didn't out these people. They've been reported on (not just gossiped about) as being gay for years. Like him or not, Musto is a reporter and has been for a very long time, and he knows these people are gay. Other reporters do as well but have not reported it.

To call the cover shameful is to insist that there is something shameful about being gay. There’s nothing shameful, in my opinion, about being gay, therefore, there’s nothing shameful about accurate reporting about gay celebrities. Who cares if they’ve said so in press releases? This is simply accurate reporting. (Anyone who balks at that should actually READ the article on out.com.) Would anyone balk at the reporting on Lindsay Lohan’s latest boyfirend? Hardly. So why get your panties in a twist over this?

Moreover, these people are celebrities, and actively seek public attention. Anyone who fusses over this should immediately and forever resist reading US, People, and any other magazine that reports on the personal lives of celebrities. You can’t have it both ways: Celebrity reporting is bad–whether gay or straight—or it’s OK.

Beyond that, Musto didn’t out these people. They’ve been reported on (not just gossiped about) as being gay for years.

]]> By: duane http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6373 duane Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:46:34 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6373 GREAT point. Note that this statement will be immediately retracted from my post. GREAT point. Note that this statement will be immediately retracted from my post.

]]> By: Dr. Sparky http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6370 Dr. Sparky Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:27:00 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6370 "Sure, they MAY be gay (i.e., I’m pretty sure that they are)..." So it's okay for you to proclaim them as gay on your blog, but it is not okay for a magazine to do it? Sure, Out has a few more readers than you, but it's the same thing. And I have seen it on so many blogs. How many people assume Sanjaya is gay or look for every chance to prove Jake Gylenhaal is more like his Brokeback character than he'd like to admit? How come it's only bad when it's on a magazine? “Sure, they MAY be gay (i.e., I’m pretty sure that they are)…”

So it’s okay for you to proclaim them as gay on your blog, but it is not okay for a magazine to do it? Sure, Out has a few more readers than you, but it’s the same thing. And I have seen it on so many blogs. How many people assume Sanjaya is gay or look for every chance to prove Jake Gylenhaal is more like his Brokeback character than he’d like to admit?

How come it’s only bad when it’s on a magazine?

]]> By: duane http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6358 duane Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:37:54 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6358 That's just it Kim, I don't think that they even thought of that; which is why I am so surprised, to be honest. That’s just it Kim, I don’t think that they even thought of that; which is why I am so surprised, to be honest.

]]> By: Kim http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-6357 Kim Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:21:40 +0000 http://www.duanemoody.com/2007/04/shame-on-you-out-magazine/#comment-6357 You really would think that the people at Out would know better. I wonder if they even thought about what would have happened if their own sexual orientation was splashed all over a magazine cover before they came out. You really would think that the people at Out would know better. I wonder if they even thought about what would have happened if their own sexual orientation was splashed all over a magazine cover before they came out.

]]>