Let’s hear it for John Carroll! The busy Broadway performer whose resume includes show-stopping turns in A Chorus Line, Follies and Wicked, was recently named one of the sexiest men alive of Australia’s gorgeous gay glossy DNA.
We have to say we knew it all along. In addition to his photogenic good looks and rock-hard physique, Carroll is a solid, upstanding member of the queer community. Not only is he happily married, he’s also a committed and passionate activist who has contributed a number of thought-provoking essays to this website.
Last fall, while many were raving over the recently-appointed Pope Francis, Carroll had some choice words of advice for the new pontiff. Later, he took aim at the art of the humblebrag on Facebook and even gently wrapped us on the knuckles for linking newly out Michael Sam’s boyfriend to a gay porn star. Eager to help spread word about a talented pal, he interviewed his photographer buddy Kevin McDermott about his sensational coffee table book Virgin Island.
Still, Carroll keeps his ego and good fortune in check. “They say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” he told Queerty about the DNA honor. “In my case, it helps if the beholder is highly intoxicated or has inoperable cataracts.”
For more information on him, go to TheJohnCarroll.com or follow him on Twitter and Instagram at @MrJohnCarroll. Scroll down to see more sexy photos of the man, all taken by Kevin McDermott.
Re: “Carroll is a solid, upstanding member of the queer community. Not only is he happily married, …”
What does being married have to do with being a solid, upstanding member of the queer community?
Very sexy! Among sexiest men alive, would need to do some research, lol. Seems like pretty good guy.
@vive: with all due respect, why do you object to marriage as being seen as being seen as a positive quality?
@DarkZephyr: God I wish there was an edit button.
@vive: It would help to read the entire sentence and then NOT take things out of context. Once you accomplish this, the answer to your question should be obvious.
@vive: I agree with you there. I wish gay people would stop buying into the politics of respectability because it certainly reads as if the writer is saying that part of what makes Carroll “solid” and “upstanding” is his being married. If he were single and dating/screwing around yet still all of the other things, would he then not be? That may not have been the intention, but the wording makes me infer otherwise.
@DarkZephyr, trust me, being married is not what makes someone an “upstanding” person. Marriage status is neither a positive nor a negative quality. What I found objectionable was the subtext that being unmarried (promiscuous or not) makes you less “upstanding,” less “solid,” less respectable. There is really no other way of taking what he author says. Some of the best and kindest people I know also happen to sleep around, and so what?
damn near physically perfect.
What a beautiful guy! Just looking at his pic sent by BP rocketing. Why was I cursed with such a high libido?
Hey some mag that no one reads thinks this guy is HOT! who knew
Just another Ken doll…with a beard
What the heck is worng with his arm pits… they are not sexy at all… gross
@vive: At times I agree with a lot of what you have to say, and like reading your point of view. But you are wrong here.
Please re-read, because neither Queerty or the writer ever said, or even implied that him being married is connected to him being an
“solid, upstanding member of the Queer community.”
From what I got , Queerty mentioning hm being ( happily) married is telling people more about him,his life and relationships status. I don’t think it’s in any way ment to slight singles, or imply that someone who is single cannot be a ” solid, upstanding Queer individual.
And how anyone can come away with that conclusion is beyond me…
@vive: I personally don’t think that seeing marriage as a positive quality makes being single a negative one. I think marriage is wonderful when its between two people that are genuinely in love. I definitely see it as a positive. I guess how we view these things is a subjective thing, but I don’t really see it as a reason to take offense. I absolutely hate being single, so for me being single IS a negative, but I also know plenty of people who are happily single. For my part I look forward to my impending marriage to my fiance with great anticipation. I don’t think that my marriage will magically make me “upstanding” but I think that its a decent indication that I love my man.
@Ottoman: I agree that marriage in of itself does not make a person “upstanding” but I really don’t think there is actually anything in the article to take offense at.
I find it hard to believe that some of you have read that portion of this post in context and not drawn the conclusion that the writer links Carroll’s being married to being “a solid, upstanding member of the queer community,” if only as a matter of syntax. Right after he says that he then mentions his marital status in connection to his activism. What else is the reader supposed to take from that? As I said in my earlier post, I won’t assume that that was the writer’s intention, but in phrasing the paragraph the way he did, that’s how it reads to me.
@DarkZephyr: You may find being single as “a negative,” but do you think it affects your upstanding-ness? It is the correlation of the two that gave offense.
There are many ways to take offense to the suggestion that being married connotes an upstanding character. First, as had been already said, it implies that those who aren’t married are less upstanding. Aside from the fact that many people just don’t want to get married or aren’t in a relationship, there are still many people who can’t get married locally or, if they did get married, it would hurt them too much financially or socially or legally so it’s not an option. Second, it co-opts that whole false and antiquated notion that marriage is itself is some kind of upstanding or redeeming act. Ted Haggard is married, is his marriage something to marvel at? How about Ray Rice’s marriage? Third, a lot of people in the LGBT movement are not only offended but hurt by the fact that marriage equality seems to have taken over the entire rights movement to the point where the issues of poor and homeless gays, gays of color, gay women’s financial and societal disadvantages etc. are marginalized.
I will concede that Queerty’s long and illustrious history of poor grammar and marginally coherent writing speaks to the possibility that it wasn’t the writer’s intent to conflate marriage with being upstanding, But he did. A better start to that sentence would be: “This happily married man is a committed and passionate…” Or leave that whole thing out and throw in somewhere “sorry guys, he’s taken.”
@Ottoman, “Or leave that whole thing out and throw in somewhere “sorry guys, he’s taken.””
Good post. However, he may be “taken,” but it doesn’t follow that he is necessarily monogamous. 🙂
Gosh, the single people here are so touchy. That’s probably why nobody loves them. You have uses, single people: You support takeout food business, and drunks have someone to talk to in bars.
Of course being in a relationship makes this guy more upstanding. If he were single, he’d be more like…..well….YOU!
@lykeitiz: We single folk also have another use, which is secretly schtupping your husband while you post inane comments on Queerty.
@Ottoman: “Third, a lot of people in the LGBT movement are not only offended but hurt by the fact that marriage equality seems to have taken over the entire rights movement to the point where the issues of poor and homeless gays, gays of color, gay women’s financial and societal disadvantages etc. are marginalized.”
I am quite glad that marriage equality is so big right now it NEEDED to be addressed and its not done being addressed. The time to address it is now while it has steam. We won’t stop fighting for ALL of the rights we should have as equal members of the human race but right now its TIME for marriage equality.
@tdh1980: I think what I am feeling here is a sense of being really tired of others trying to make those of us who do value love based marriage and relationships feel guilty for placing value on them. I am sorry but I do value them and I DON’T feel guilty for that. I am tired of people saying that we are “assimilating” or “buying into the politics of respectability” if we value marriage. I don’t think that it magically makes him “upstanding” but if he is truly in love with his husband and he values him then yes I DO think it indicates that he just might be a solid guy and I am WON’T be ashamed of that point of view. I admit it. I DO find marriage to be respectable. But guess what? I think being single is as well for those who value and enjoy it. Why can’t I view them both as being respectable?
I have no problem with either marriage itself or any one person’s desire to be married. You like it? Great. Wanna do it? Fine. Have at it. I. Don’t. Care. The ONLY thing with which I take issue is the writer’s poor arrangement of words which makes it seem like he believes matrimony makes gay men “solid” and “upstanding,” which definitely gives off the dangerous whiff of respectability politics in my opinion. That. Is. All. Sure, there are those of us who think that there aspects of queer equality that far exceed our present focus on marriage, but that doesn’t mean any of us are against the institution.
@DarkZephyr, “I am quite glad that marriage equality is so big right now it NEEDED to be addressed.”
Sure. But it is when it is being addressed at the EXPENSE of others that I object. Some supporters of gay marriage (including several posters here and possibly the author) think they need to distance themselves from, insult, and isolate single or non-monogamous people, all in support of the marriage cause. And not to mention taking attention and funds away from other life or death issues that happen to be “minor” for the upper middle class white donors to gay causes.
@OrchidIslander: Can I watch??
You probably didn’t recognize that as being a joke either.
Like I said……Touchy!
Comments are closed.