Adam Lambert is damaging the gay image - Page 2

[snl89]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 7:46pm

I would comment, but this awesome youtuber says it far more eloquently than I could

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmLT7ejHv4g

starting at around 2:20:

"When Justin Timberlake tore Janet Jackson's clothes off during the Super Bowl and half of America got to see her breast with a giant paper clip on it, were they worried about heterosexual life? Did mainstream America see this as a reason to vote against straight people and stop them from getting married? NO. Do you know why? Because that has nothing to do with it. People can do whatever the eff they want on stage. They can be as disturbing, vulgar, obscene, and shocking as they please and they still have the right to marry. Heterosexuals have been far more explicit than anything Adam's ever done, and nobody even dares to think that their marriages can be voted on. And really, do you think not being able to get married is going to discourage people from being scandalous on stage? Well guess what- it's not working. If anyone actually thinks this is a valid basis to vote against gay marriage, then that needs to be called out for what it is: spiteful idiocy. And it doesn't need to be endorsed by the editor of a gay website. The fact is, Adam was exactly right about the different standards that are imposed upon anyone who isn't heterosexual. And with every passing day, these people are proving just how right he was. Holding gay people to a separate standard so nobody will be made uncomfortable by having to see them is unfathomably more offensive than any part of Adam's performance. Gay people exist. Gay people are gay. Gay people will be open about that. And sometimes, gay people can be just as sexual and suggestive and heterosexual performers often are. LIVE with it. God knows we put up with your sh*t!"

:)


Or, in other words, what emcee said :P



EDIT: Oh shoot, sorry, that actually wasn't the same article that I was thinking it was (there was another that was similar, but also talked about how his image was "hurting the fight for gay marriage equality"). But.. the above argument is still a great one

And yeah, basically Adam isn't hurting the gay male image at ALL. He's just forcing people out of their comfort zone, and challenging their tendencies to simply overlook a person's homosexuality, instead of truly seeing it as equal. Granted the performance itself was not that strong, and so it wasn't necessarily all that effective. But the very fact that he dared to GET sexual on stage was actually a good thing in my book. People NEED to learn to be okay with seeing two men get sexy with each other, just like they're fine seeing a guy and and a girl get sexy with each other. Chastising Adam for the mere fact that he got promiscuous on stage is simply helping to send the message that homosexuality is somehow more indecent than heterosexuality.

Updated On: 12/10/09 at 07:46 PM

[soapguy17]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 10:34pm

Whaa. . .I'm hoping against hoping that he's being sarcastic or ironic. I don't have a religion, but I'm going to pray for it too. Seriously, guy? Seriously?

[Jon]

Posted: 12/10/09 at 10:53pm

Adam's "look" doesn't strike me as "gay" or "punk". it strikes me as the live-action version of an Anime' character.