Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
Want the World to Know

Adam Lambert Will Acknowledge the Obvious on Rolling Stone

lambertstar

It’s sort of hard to say Adam Lambert — who’s never really hidden his sexuality (and Idol judge Kara DioGuardi already told The View Lambert wasn’t closeted) — will “come out,” but that’s the big plan for next week’s Rolling Stone. The event will be significant, if only because celebrities usually come out on the cover of People.

Meanwhile, Adam made his first stab back at Clay Aiken, who slammed-then-apologized Lambert: “I don’t know Clay,” Lambert told Access Hollywood. “I’m glad he’s getting headlines now though, because he wasn’t before.”

By:           editor editor
On:           May 29, 2009
Tagged: , ,
  • 53 Comments
    • dgz
      dgz

      ha! love the quote about clay. you left out the coattails reference, though.

      there’s also a really good video interview at idolatry.
      http://www.ew.com/ew/package/0,,20007164_20174011,00.html

      May 29, 2009 at 9:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mylilpip
      mylilpip

      people were up in arms that America didn’t vote for the openly gay Lambert but he’s just NOW coming out publicly and for a nice sum, i’m sure.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @mylilpip: I don’t think Rolling Stone pays for their coverage.

      But it does give him more publicity.

      That being said, if you think Adam Lambert’s sexuality was a secret, I’d like to know what life is like on Earth 2. I didn’t watch any American Idol episodes and I pretty much knew he was a homo.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Gay Numbers
      The Gay Numbers

      @Alec: Ha- Earth 2 = comic book geek.

      OT: This only reinforces to me the media’s issue with gays. They still do not know how to respond to sexuality without it feeling accusatory. Some of the coverage makes it seem like there is something he should be ashamed to have like a disease.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      Don’t fall for Rolling Stone magazine’s supposed open-mindedness. Rolling Stone magazine has a history of discriminating against male-male sexuality in favor of female-female sexuality. Time after time, it has shown female nudity (such as the current issue with Lady Ga Ga on the cover) but not male nudity. Time after time, it has had covers showing two women together – with suggestions of lesbianism or bisexuality – but not two men together in the same context. It gives ample coverage to female bisexual porn stars (such as Sasha Grey and Jenna Jameson) but not male bisexual porn stars.

      Rolling Stone magazine is discriminatory and has a double standard. Its editors can go jump.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @The Gay Numbers: Guilty as charged. :-)

      Re: Media coverage. I think they’re accustomed to covering for celebs who want to remain “discreet.” I don’t think it is necessarily an overt bias on their part. Additionally, they are subject to libel suits if they get it wrong. Along with invasion of privacy torts. They have lawyers look over all of this stuff before it is ever published. I think they just shy away from covering it explicitly if the figure in question doesn’t make a statement to that effect.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      Rolling Stone magazine is guilty of a bisexual double standard. It promotes the “females are bisexual” line for the purpose of titillation of sleazy straight guys. There have been countless female entertainers who have been glamorized for their supposed bisexuality in Rolling Stone magazine. On the other hand, it avoids promoting the “males are bisexual” line for reasons of not wanting to offend males who are homophobic at heart.

      It’s a magazine which is homophobic at heart. As such, I’ll avoid it.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @mike: You sound like one of our resident sex radicals, Jason. He, too, believes that the entertainment industry is complicit in a bias against gay male sexuality. I’d argue that there’s some bias there, and also some reflection of the bias in American popular culture.

      Rolling Stone is really gay friendly, though. You’ve apparently decided to ignore their homoerotic advertising and their coverage of gay rights issues.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      Alec,

      Rolling Stone magazine only discusses male-male sexuality in a limited academic or amusing fashion. Female-female sexuality, on the other hand, gets the embrace. It is discussed as “hot”, the implication being that it’s much better than those “icky male gays or icky male bi’s”. You see this in the coverage as I described in my previous posts.

      Rolling Stone magazine seems to think that we in the GLBT community are stupid. I’ve got news for Jann Wenner and Will Dana: we in the GLBT community won’t accept your bisexual double standard. Go jump, guys.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alec
      Alec

      @mike: Are you sure you’re not Jason? He said the exact same thing, I’m pretty sure. Almost word for word.

      Like I said, I think it is partly a reflection of a cultural bias.

      May 29, 2009 at 10:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChristopherM
      ChristopherM

      @mike:

      They have shown male nudity on the cover. The Red Hot Chili Peppers were on there showing just as much as Janet Jackson or Lady Gaga ever did.

      May 29, 2009 at 11:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @Alec: calling someone jason? for shame, alec. mike hasn’t even said anything bad about black people!

      May 29, 2009 at 11:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      Christopher M,

      Red Hot Chilli Peppers? That was over 12 years ago!!! Just look at Rolling Stone’s covers over the last 5 years: whenever there’s a woman on there, she’s nearly naked. Not so the men, though.

      The problem with Rolling Stone magazine is that it filters its depictions of sexuality through the lens of the sleazy straight guy fantasy, and not through the lens of inclusiveness or fairness. MTV is similar.

      It’s about time the GLBT community woke up to this.

      May 30, 2009 at 12:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mike
      mike

      Rolling Stone and MTV are basically trying to buy our love. Sorry, guys, won’t work this time.

      May 30, 2009 at 12:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      Actually, a mere couple of years ago, people would be writing “Adam Lambert Admits the Obvious,” not “Acknowledges.”
      Which is a step in the right direction. But here’s what I don’t like. It continues the ancient, hoary notion that we should EXPECT a gay guy to wear foundation and eyeliner and be,
      as Judge Scalia called Judge Souter, “overwrought.”

      We know that lesbians come in all sorts of shades. Butch, femme, lipstick, Birkenstock, militant, girlie, mom, girl next
      door. But to turn on any channel on TV, the only gays shown are the stereotypical mincing in-your-face ones that never actually NEED coming out. Adam Lambert for one. Daniel Choi, for another.

      One way to help correct the situation would be for a lot of high-profile gay men to come out, but I’m not holding my breath.

      May 30, 2009 at 12:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mimi
      mimi

      ohhhhhhhhhh ppl i am gone say dis again even if adam is gay some strights must just hide lol do u hv any idea how hot he is ; wooo he’s a hoty and kinda manly than cris da only reason he didn’t won is bcoz ppl made da same mistake i did , evry 1 voted 4 cris coz we thought da whole usa was gone vote 4 adam then i hated myself 4 doing tat cmon who cares if he do it 4m back or front it’s all about talent & he was da best on their idol stage !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! period

      May 30, 2009 at 2:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kid A
      Kid A

      People tend to think that female nudity is sexy, and male nudity is funny. Look at the way both are used in comedies.

      May 30, 2009 at 2:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay

      Support Adam! He is so talented. Buy Adam’s studio versions of the songs he performed on Idol, they are great.

      May 30, 2009 at 3:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @ProfessorVP: daniel choi “minces?” huh.

      May 30, 2009 at 4:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Qjersey
      Qjersey

      People still read magazines?

      May 30, 2009 at 6:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • malina
      malina

      [img]http://i42.tinypic.com/28jinbn.jpg[/img]

      May 30, 2009 at 10:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alan brickman
      alan brickman

      Why shouldn’t you get paid to come out??? All the other “heroes” in entertainment do…..

      May 30, 2009 at 10:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      @dgz: Yeah I really don’t get this self-hating thing among our community. Previously in a post DABQ was complaining about Dan Choi’s weakness as a spokesperson because he “lisped it out.” Maybe this comes from the older GLBT crowd who were fearful of anyone less that the ‘ultra-butch’ gay for fear of being branded as one of those limp-wristed, mincing, lisping gays. I really hope this attitude dies out as quickly as the older generation that do not approve of marriage equality. I am shamed by that remark.He wants the high-profile men to come out-as long as they meet a certain standard of ‘macho.’

      May 30, 2009 at 11:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      Sorry if you thought I was addressing you DGZ, I was aiming my disgust at ProfessorVP’s remark as well.

      May 30, 2009 at 11:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kid A
      Kid A

      @ProfessorVP: I know plenty of straight guys that are more effeminate than many gays I know. It’s not smart to assume that an effeminate man is just gay and “doesn’t need to come out.” They may be straight.

      May 30, 2009 at 12:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @edgyguy1426: i know what you mean; i just had a similar debate in another thread. i’m also in disbelief because i thought choi was more masculine than most of my straight friends.

      May 30, 2009 at 1:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      Well hopefully these attitudes will change. I admit when I was a teen and watched the news during Pride Day I used to think to myself “Please don’t show the drag queens, please don’t show the dykes on bikes..” because I didn’t want people that DID know about me to identify me with these groups. Now that I’m grown up, I get pissed at gays who bear grudges at other gays based on their masculine/feminine qualities… most recently calling out Choi for ‘mincing or lisping.’ Ugh.

      May 30, 2009 at 2:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lee
      Lee

      Perhaps I missed it in the ping pong, but no one seems to have mentioned that the cofouder and publisher of Stone [along with US Weekly & Mens Journal] is GAY GAY GAY!

      Fourteen years ago, after 28 years of marriage to a woman with whom he fathered three kids, Wenner left her for a man. Even more relevant to this thread is that, shortly afterwards, a bit of a war of homophobia masquerading as “It’s A Private Matter” broke out between pubishing houses, with some accusing others “inning” Wenner.

      A key factor in the debate was the fact that Wenner had been a very public figure for decades, with a long history of stories alleging public alcohol and drug abuse…but, for weeks, there was a conspiracy of silence about the reason behind the longtime-marriage breakup of a Rock&Roll icon until the self-imposed embargo broke and Wenner was widely outed including ON THE FRONT PAGE of no less than the Wall Street Journal!

      Per a Newsday article by gay Gabriel Rotello, “New York magazine’s Jeanie Kasindorf opined that “Wenner may have thoughthe was protected by an unstated policy deeming celebrity gayness the last taboo subject. But,” she rightly concluded, “he was done in by the press’s increasing impatience with the have-it-both-ways hypocrisy of it all.”

      Some blamed the “Velvet Mafia,” but the more recent obits ignoring the very gay lives of writer Susan Sontag, Raymond Burr, soldier Alan Rogers, and Merv Griffin….not to mention the nudge nudge wink wink enabling of Starchild Anderson Cooper’s public closet….prove that straight homophobic pricks in mainstream media are still very much alive and swill.

      Even when Wenner touched upon his gayness in an interview with Charlie Rose two years ago, Rose, ever the inquisitive tangetizer but notorious for how invisible gay issues typically are on his broad-topic show [unless the subject of "art" like BBM] wouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot Ralph Lauren pole.

      For the record, the man who stole Wenner’s heart and Mrs. Wenner’s husband was former Calvin’s underwear model and fashonista Matt Nye, with whom he now has three kids by adoption/surrogacy. There was some supposed scandal a couple of years back, that Wenner forcefully denied, about his alleged going behind Nye’s back [pun intended] with Neal Boulton, then editor of Men’s Fitness…wait for it…himself then with wife and kids…a Harlotquin Bimance no regular Queerty reader could have missed.

      Wait…wait….it get’s juicier…or sleazier, depending on your point of view.

      Boulton…who looks like the luv child of Neil Sedaka and a Tagalog tranny…became editor of the now dead gay rag Genre and one of he many players in the gay side of the current print publishing crash.

      And, just a month ago, Queerty reported that, “Now he toils away on something called BastardLife.com, a site for bisexuals, which Boulton sometimes is when he’s not pronouncing his return to heterosexuality while he bangs his wife,” and that an anonymous e-mail, possibly from Boulton himself based on his supposed history of self-promotion a la scandal, said he was in rehab and had “left the hospital for the SECOND time this week due to detoxing from alchohol and cocaine.”

      There’s MUCH MUCH more….including Boulton’s possible connection to a possible swindle of MILLIONS of tax dollars by his one time boss, gay porn, a few AC/DC women…. but I’d have to Lysol my eyes after rereading it and my keyboard after summarizing for y’all. Just use Queerty’s search for “Boulton” and you can infect yourself. The Queerties must own high grade HazMat suits.

      So back to RS. This is what I know:

      While he is a well-known Card Carrying Liberal, with an admirable history of financing and hyperbolic promoting of Dem candidates in his rags [and a delicious US hit piece on Sarah Palenolithic], and a justifiably rabid hatred of Bush fils, you won’t find multimillionaire Wenner’s name among the donors to fight Prop H8TE. And you’d, apparently, be hard pressed to find his name in other discussions of gay rights/AIDS fundraising. {If someone can find something, I’d love to be proven wrong.]

      When asked about the significant differences in his life over RS’s 40+ years he talks about getting-older physical changes not having spent 30 years pretending to be straight. Regrets? Not enough time to ski.

      Beefcake photos are not a political statement.

      Per glbtq.com: “Although Rolling Stone has published short articles and reviews of publicly out musicians such as Rufus Wainwright and groups such as Sleater-Kinney, glbtq performers and issues have rarely been featured on the cover or in major pieces in the magazine. They certainly do not seem to be actively promoted by the magazine.In fact, several lesbian and feminist musicians, most notably Amy Ray of the folk/pop group Indigo Girls, have castigated Wenner in interviews and song lyrics for his complicity in the music industry’s institutionalization of sexism and homophobia.”

      While statistics on their possible use of waterboarding are still being tabulating, the pseudo glam and pseudo noble publishing world is as cutthroat, psychotic, and driven by greed as a Columbian crack cartel.

      May 30, 2009 at 2:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      @Kid A:
      You miss the point, Kid. Sure there are straight guys who register 8 on the Foof-o-meter, and would likely hike their pant legs and shriek at the sight of a kitchen mouse. No one is denying that. What I said was that although there are different brands of hetero males and females, as well as diverse lesbians, just watch movies and especially TV, and there is only one model of gay man, the Mincemobile. What is wrong with that, to me, is that any garden variety religious nincompoop, say, the type who was so gung ho about Prop 8, can go through his day thinking he has seen only one gay man, when, in fact, he has really seen a dozen, interracted with them, and the sky didn’t fall. See what I mean?

      May 30, 2009 at 6:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      @dgz:
      Yes, I’m not going to mince words. Choi minces. But there is room for all of us. If Dan Choi wants to mince, okay. In fact, there should be a place for him to meet similar gay men. I would call it a Mince Meet.

      That said, let us grow up. You can’t have somebody point out how counterproductive, useless and bigoted DADT is unless he is capable of refuting the ancient American stereotypes about gay men. We know, or we should know, that many nations have incorporated open gays and lesbians into their militaries, but those nations are just not as tree-stump DUMB as ours. We also know that it was commonplace for Greek warriors to have young lovers and train them for battle. No less than Alexander the Great was queer. But none of that matters… Americans will presume that a gay man can’t fight aggressively for Big Oil and Halliburton (which is terribly important, you know) because he might get a run in his stocking. It doesn’t matter that the arguments in favor of keeping DADT are childish and idiotic; to refute them, you need somebody up to the task, somebody with the audio-visual to convince people, “If this is a gay person in the military, then I was wrong.” And Choi ain’t it.

      May 30, 2009 at 6:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @ProfessorVP: respectfully, i think your perceptions concerning masculinity are a bit off. i don’t think 1 in 10 straights who met choi would guess that he’s homosexual. and obviously they didn’t, because he wasn’t ever investigated by the military until he came out on msnbc.

      i understand that many stereotypes are force-fed, and that effeminacy is one of them. but i also think it’s grossly patronizing to put guys down who are, or ask them not to speak out or act as leaders in our movement because they happen to be a little wristy. that’s like asking only light-skinned black people to lead a march. (and i wouldn’t use the ancient greeks as an example, but that’s beside the point.)

      lastly, i don’t think you understand the homophobic military mindset. they’re not worried about effeminacy (or they wouldn’t have allowed women), they’re worried about butt-sex in the barracks, and getting hit-on or harrassed. those worries fall more under the stereotype of promiscuity, so perhaps we should find a gay monk to lead the charge?

      personally, i just don’t think acceptance necessitates conformity. although from a purely pragmatic, ends-justify-means strategic point of view, you’re probably right.

      May 30, 2009 at 8:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ProfessorVP
      ProfessorVP

      @dgz:
      DGZ, your last paragraph tells me By George, he’s got it. Yes, it is not ideological, moral, ethical or even logical… just plain ol’ practical.

      Your “1 in 10″ theory strikes out. It is like saying 1 in 10 wouldn’t notice the Grand Canyon is large. Choi himself, in an interview, recalled how he puffed himself up for the big moment to tell his so-called buddies he was gay, started ‘splainin, and they told him they knew already.

      May 30, 2009 at 8:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      At the legal level, we need to fight for our rights under the “gay rights” banner. That’s because it’s at the legal level where conservatives are trying to take away our rights.

      At the social/cultural level, we need to fight for recogniton of male bisexuality. That’s because it’s at the social/cultural level where liberals – like Rolling Stone magazine – are trying to create a bisexual double standard wherein female bisexuality is glamorized and male bisexuality is ignored or demonized.

      The aim of liberalism is to make bisexuality socially acceptable for women but not for men. When you understand this, you understand the nature of liberalism and its hypocritical nature.

      May 30, 2009 at 9:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Phoenix (Foot Soldier in the Pink Platoon)
      Phoenix (Foot Soldier in the Pink Platoon)

      People think Lambert is in the closet? And someone is actually giving him money to “come out”? Really

      I own a bridge in Brooklyn I’m looking to sell. Someone get me Jann Wenner on the phone and tell him a hot deal real estate investment just came up.

      May 31, 2009 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • christophe
      christophe

      @Phoenix (Foot Soldier in the Pink Platoon): From everything I’ve heard, Rolling Stones is “NOT” paying Adam for this article, its simply to promote him. Somebody on here threw it out that he was being paid and some here have simply run with it without any confirmation at all.

      May 31, 2009 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • christophe
      christophe

      On bestgayblogs.com “American Idol judge Kara DioGuardi has set the record straight on Adam Lambert’s buzzed-about sexuality: He’s gay.
      “I don’t think that Adam was ever in [the closet],” she says in a taped interview airing Friday on ABC’s The View. “I think he was always openly out.”

      May 31, 2009 at 2:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      @dgz: ” but i also think it’s grossly patronizing to put guys down who are, or ask them not to speak out or act as leaders in our movement because they happen to be a little wristy..” It brings the old -if you want to represent us, you have to ‘butch it up’ Thanks for that.
      J.T.

      Jun 1, 2009 at 12:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lex
      Lex

      @dgz: That was a very bad example.

      Being black and being gay are two entirely different things. You can see someone is black. You can’t see someone is gay or feminine unless they choose to make it known through common stereotypes.

      So many gay men choose to run around like the same movie caricatures that were used to make fun of us. The fact that so many defend it is ludicrous at best. No one should want to act like that and purposely portray a negative stereotype.

      Gay men aren’t born acting that way, it’s taught by other gay men who have absolutely no respect for themselves. They think they’re fighting the ridicule by embracing it, at this point they’re the only ones keeping it around.

      Those caricatures died out long ago and only continue to be in the eye of the media because of gay men who refuse to snap out of it and reclaim their masculinity they allowed straight men to take away from them.

      All gay men should want to be twice as masculine just to prove to straight homophobes that trying to demean us and emasculate us won’t work. They do it to keep us looking as inhuman as possible and like suckers so many of us fall for it.

      The number one argument I always hear against gay men is how feminine and ‘nasty’ we supposedly are. Stop playing a caricature and be yourself. If you happen to be feminine, fine, so be it, but I don’t buy that the number is nearly as large as the number of people faking it to fit in.

      Jun 1, 2009 at 12:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @Lex: your last sentence contradicts the whole rest of your post. if being feminine is “fine” then why do you also call it “negative,” and “caricature,” and without self-respect?

      and i think it’s telling that you believe femininity is so awful. it’s also clear that you aren’t around children very much. there are lots of feminine 5 year old boys running around who’ve never met a gay man. many lesbians are masculine, many gays are feminine, and most had no choice in the matter.

      and while i (obviously) agree that gay and black are different things, your argument is logically flawed. if effeminate gays should choose to act differently, then perhaps the dark skinned brothers in the march should have applied make-up or skin bleached? that would also be a choice.

      i accept professorvp’s point of pragmatism, but yours is a value judgement, and i can’t respect a lack of tolerance. i also find that the gays who most object to effeminacy are the queeniest of us all, and just don’t realize. i’m sure that doesn’t apply to you, of course.

      Jun 1, 2009 at 3:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @dgz:

      @Lex: your last sentence contradicts the whole rest of your post. if being feminine is “fine” then why do you also call it “negative,” and “caricature,” and without self-respect?

      As I just said to a dear friend of mine in an e-mail to him…

      “Just like the chest-thumping macho types who go around making the bad fag jokes to throw-off any suspicion of perhaps being gay themselves.

      The people around us are like mirrors for us to look into. It’s an often observed and well-documented fact, that we dislike in others what we see and don’t like in ourselves.

      Jun 1, 2009 at 3:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @schlukitz: tru dat.

      Jun 1, 2009 at 3:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aurora
      Aurora

      OK…a straight older woman here…

      I get all the angst about political social issues. I get it. And you lot are very articulate…so I hope you don’t mind my throwing my little wrench into the fray…

      I think the real issue here (why all the interest in whether Adam is or isn’t), is because he’s got women of all ages watching with that old excitement only a very few entertainers have been able to achieve.

      How do I explain this without offending anybody…gay performers have always been great! the best! the most interesting!

      But…this guy is turning everybody on…how does that happen? That’s why some people are insisting there must be a ‘bi-sexual explanation’…see, that would make it easier for many of us to understand why we’re finding him the sexiest man since Jim Morrison…with a little of that old Elvis magic thrown in. Add in some early Mick Jagger for measure too.

      ———–

      One thing I really haven’t been able to understand…why have so many gay men been loudly proclaiming their anger at him? Richard Lawson on Gawker and Perez Hilton have said things that were really uncalled for…baiting him it seems…and as so many have said, Adam doesn’t seem to have been hiding anything. His poise in interviews has been almost as interesting to watch as his performances.

      Geez, I wish I were a young, attractive, interesting theatre guy!! I didn’t realize my life was so dull until Adam and his lifestyle flew into my face!

      Jun 1, 2009 at 5:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Aurora:

      As a gay older man, I loved your candid and amusing comments. It’s always nice to have positive input from our straight friends and allies.

      Thank you so much for visiting our site and sharing your thoughts with us. And do come back and visit with us anytime. :)

      Jun 1, 2009 at 5:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dgz
      dgz

      @Aurora:

      i agree. despite people saying “why does it matter, you’ll never have a chance with him, gay or straight,” fantasy is an important part of the equation, and the possibility — however remote — is important to many fans who care about the artist him/herself as much (or more) than the music. not my own personal philosophy, but i ain’t judgin.

      as for part deux of your post: perez is just lashing out because he’s a deeply unhappy person. other (more reasonable) gays are upset because it’s obvious that he’s gay, but not answering implies that it’s somehow shameful, or that he cares more about money than the community. gay men are also desperate for an a-lister, a face, who’s embraced by the mainstream. we don’t have a leader, but will settle for a symbol, a figurehead. these aren’t my personal thoughts, mind, just my observations.

      but i enjoyed your post. allies are awesome.

      Jun 1, 2009 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aurora
      Aurora

      @dgz:

      and No. 43 · schlukitz:

      Thanks so much guys. I appreciate the welcome.

      I don’t know…I thought I’d been around. Seen a lot. I guess things have just been so…Republican…during the last decade or so. Any breath of fresh air brings back whiffs of the glory days when life was to be lived. Do you know what I mean?

      As far as the fantasy element…I have always lusted after guys who are unavailable. OK…Clark Gable, Cary Grant, Jim Morrison, and c’mon, Elvis on Ed Sullivan. Course they all died before my time…but there are just not enough of these magical men out there.

      So, here comes Adam Lambert, singing “Satisfaction” and moving like he’s feeling it, and I just had to sit up and pay attention! Bring on “Feeling Good” and “Whole Lotta Love” and I was ready to faint. Add to that the FABulous YouTube videos of him singing at the Upright Cabaret, and I’m a die-hard fan. Check them out if you haven’t already…truly a passionate performer.

      I hope he will take a turn with QUEEN…from all accounts, they nurtured and protected Freddie when it was perhaps a bit more difficult to do so. That could be a nice liberal platform from which to spring.

      P.S. I left NYC to live in Europe for 20 years…so America was hard even for me to come home to…I can’t imagine the struggle you all have been through since Reagan. Love is love…and you’re lucky if you find it, so continue the fight.

      But…please share Adam Lambert with all of us undersexed women reliving our youthful fantasies of guys secure enough in there masculinity to ‘doll it up’ a little…

      Jun 1, 2009 at 6:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zsuzsanna
      Zsuzsanna

      Dear all! I read your comments with extreme excitement – even though being Hungarian I can just wish that I understood every single word, but I`am learning. It is fantastic to see how many of us feel the same way about this fabulous guy. Keep writing, I`ll keep reading it with pleasure! Hope he does too!! He would deserve to know how much we adore him! :)

      Jun 1, 2009 at 6:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aurora
      Aurora

      @Aurora:

      “But…please share Adam Lambert with all of us undersexed women reliving our youthful fantasies of guys secure enough in their masculinity to ‘doll it up’ a little…”

      Been thinking this was a poor choice of words…maybe “being ‘insecure’ in their masculinity” would be a better way of putting it…maybe just being secure enough as an individual so as to explore any avenues of sexuality desired is the way to say it.

      Hope I didn’t offend…

      Jun 2, 2009 at 8:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      Oh whoa Lex, so you’re sayin’ a fem guy is CHOOSING to be that way? Why? Because of all the wonderful positive reinforcement from the straight and sometimes gay community? This is at the same time so laughable and yet so sad. It’s like gay people choose that lifestyle or that it’s ‘learned’ behavior taught by other gay men. How many times have you seen and heard the argument by the opposition made that gay is a choice? This statement of yours is just as ludicrous. I think when I was in my late teens or early 20’s I used to think of fem guys.”Why are they acting like that? Can’t they just be more butch?” And then I learned to accept everyone for who they are. Maybe you’re just not there yet. I hope you do get there. I don’t know how you could condemn others for the way they are-you must really think they’re putting on an act.
      “All gay men should want to be twice as masculine just to prove to straight homophobes that trying to demean us and emasculate us won’t work.” – ick. I would hope all gay men would want to be themselves and accepted as such-no matter how ‘butch’ or ‘fem’ their behavior.

      Jun 2, 2009 at 3:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      @Aurora: Absolutely no offense taken! Maybe ‘secure in their sexuality’ would be even better. Thanks for your posts!

      Jim

      Jun 2, 2009 at 3:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      @Aurora:

      No offense taken here, either. Nice to see your continued posts on this site.

      Jun 2, 2009 at 3:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert Simone
      Robert Simone

      Nice blog here, love your style of writing mate! Plz keep up the good work ill be back to read your blog in the future

      Nov 21, 2009 at 12:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Arline Erickson
      Arline Erickson

      some really select blog posts on this site, saved to my bookmarks .

      Dec 18, 2010 at 4:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • coh4 key
      coh4 key

      Your web site is definately worthy of a bookmark, thank you!

      May 10, 2011 at 9:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.