celeb news Harry defends queerbaiting

[Abracadabra]

22 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

What’s “queer aesthetic”? Define it quick without stereotyping. 

This

 

It’s so funny to me how so many of y’all think that the only queer identities that are valid are those who are “obviously” queer. Nobody owes an explanation to anybody. Period.

Edited April 26, 2022 by Miichael

[harwee]

I honestly still don't get the raucous. Some people just seem bored to come at him g

 

Maybe he's profiting from his look, you know like all our faves, so what. This outrage is so corny so lemme give him some streams.

 

 

 

 

 

[dreampop]

you know you that F***** when you cause all this conversation 

[Katamari]

45 minutes ago, JCsNumba1Fan said:

I really, really don’t give a **** about this. He can publicly date who he wants and it still doesn’t negate that he has personally denounced being labeled straight. Y’all crack so many gay jokes, but suddenly it’s impossible for Harry Styles to have had any experiences with the same sex? So does this mean you have to be more feminine like Shawn Mendes to warrant question of your sexuality, since he exclusively dates women as well? Okay. 
 

Truthfully, the best part of Harry’s career, to me, has always been about the inclusion and representation around him, and how he promotes that. His shows are a safe place for community. He walks the walk if you look at his band (not many male artists are lacking enough ego to have women backing them). It’s not token diversity in terms of sex and race, they’re all talented and he’s lucky to have them.

 

[Touchdown]

You all want to put a label on him so bad, lol. Some of you need to go outside and get some sun and take a breath. He's a performer in the same vein as Mick Jagger and Queen, get over your sexual feelings for him, that's not his problem. 

[Into The Void]

5 minutes ago, Peroxide said:

Harry can dress however he wants to… 

 

Harry can date whoever he wants to…

 

Harry’s sex life is his business.

 

… end of story? This isn’t something that needs a dissertation.

Shouldnt this apply to Mendes too?

[loveisdead9582]

I mean, he’s not wrong but in this age having actual representation as opposed to vague hints would be a better way to go about things. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by loveisdead9582

[Protocol]

I may get attacked for saying this but someone has to say it. Let’s unpack this further.

If is indeed attracted to men, this is very much giving Adam Lambert circa 2009 being forced into the closet and deflecting questions in very much the same way. So I truly hope that’s not the case because, considering he signed an $80 million record deal, there is probably a lot of pressure for him to maintain a wide appeal, that coming out as a man attracted to other men would make the record executives uncomfortable.
 

Also, with all this talk of not wanting labels and not wanting to define things, fact that he’s attracted to women is never an issue. A song about eating *****, countless references to girls and girlfriends, being seen in public with a woman, all of that is totally fine. He doesn’t have an issue with people knowing about his sexuality……. when it comes to liking women.
 

Which leads to the obvious conclusion that either he is totally straight and this is part of his huge PR campaign to make him more interesting, or he legitimately is attracted to men, probably bi, and yet is being prevented from openly saying so, in which case he is a victim of homophobia, so it’s homophobia either way.
 

At the end of the day it’s some bullshit that you’re pretty much not allowed to say that you’re gay. And considering how gay rights are being rolled back and gay people are being attacked in many places, It’s sad to see gay people online agreeing that he doesn’t have to label himself anything, and yet not realizing that he has already labelled himself as being attracted to women time and time and time again. It’s just the MEN part that seems to be a problem. My gay brothers, we are always told our entire lives that there is something wrong with us, that we should we should be ashamed, and I honestly don’t see this as anything but a continuation of that, whether he is a victim or an enabler of it.

[mxoonlight]

It’s literally a yes or no question.  

Until it doesn’t matter (which won’t be started with Harry ****ing Styles), it will matter.

[shookspeare]

he still looks ugly wearing his grandmother's clothing

[State of Grace.]

why can't he release good music and stfu

[wehavetostan]

1 hour ago, Cloudy said:

Did he cut a hole in his sock to show us he painted his nails

yup 

[SignificantOther]

5 minutes ago, Protocol said:

I may get attacked for saying this but someone has to say it. Let’s unpack this further.

If is indeed attracted to men, this is very much giving Adam Lambert circa 2009 being forced into the closet and deflecting questions in very much the same way. So I truly hope that’s not the case because, considering he signed an $80 million record deal, there is probably a lot of pressure for him to maintain a wide appeal, that coming out as a man attracted to other men would make the record executives uncomfortable.
 

Also, with all this talk of not wanting labels and not wanting to define things, fact that he’s attracted to women is never an issue. A song about eating *****, countless references to girls and girlfriends, being seen in public with a woman, all of that is totally fine. He doesn’t have an issue with people knowing about his sexuality……. when it comes to liking women.
 

Which leads to the obvious conclusion that either he is totally straight and this is part of his huge PR campaign to make him more interesting, or he legitimately is attracted to men, probably bi, and yet is being prevented from openly saying so, in which case he is a victim of homophobia, so it’s homophobia either way.
 

At the end of the day it’s some bullshit that you’re pretty much not allowed to say that you’re gay. And considering how gay rights are being rolled back and gay people are being attacked in many places, It’s sad to see gay people online agreeing that he doesn’t have to label himself anything, and yet not realizing that he has already labelled himself as being attracted to women time and time and time again. It’s just the MEN part that seems to be a problem. My gay brothers, we are always told our entire lives that there is something wrong with us, that we should we should be ashamed, and I honestly don’t see this as anything but a continuation of that, whether he is a victim or an enabler of it.

If the label was forcing him into the closet, he wouldn't be allowed to perform a song called Medicine in which he sings about messing around with boys and girls and being ok with it. When you compare his first performance of the song with the one he just did at Coachella, it's clear as day it also involves his own personal journey and how he feels much more comfortable with his sexuality today compared to a few years ago. 

[Protocol]

4 minutes ago, mxoonlight said:

It’s literally a yes or no question.  

Until it doesn’t matter (which won’t be started with Harry ****ing Styles), it will matter.

Thank you. It’s impossible to divorce a public figure refusing to say whether he is into men or not from the fact that we live in a homophobic world.

 

Because at the end of the day he has no problem writing songs about eating *****, dating other women publicly but the second someone asked him if he might be in the guys he starts going off about how he doesn’t want to be labelled.

[Protocol]

2 minutes ago, SignificantOther said:

If the label was forcing him into the closet, he wouldn't be allowed to perform a song called Medicine in which he sings about messing around with boys and girls and being ok with it. When you compare his first performance of the song with the one he just did at Coachella, it's clear as day it also involves his own personal journey and how he feels much more comfortable with his sexuality today compared to a few years ago. 

A song that was left off of his debut album. The label has control over what’s on the album, but not what he performs. If anything this adds fuel to the idea that he is being told not to say it. 

[Peroxide]

15 minutes ago, Insanity said:

Shouldnt this apply to Mendes too?

Yes of course it should. Why shouldn't it?

[SignificantOther]

11 minutes ago, Protocol said:

A song that was left off of his debut album. The label has control over what’s on the album, but not what he performs. If anything this adds fuel to the idea that he is being told not to say it. 

And yet it is is now a fan favorite. If anything the song not being on the album but him performing it anyway has made it much more known than random album tracks. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by SignificantOther

[Headlock]

46 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

What’s “queer aesthetic”? Define it quick without stereotyping. 

It's almost like it being full of stereotypes is the point, because Harry uses them all 

[Headlock]

46 minutes ago, Protocol said:

It would be less offensive if the entertainment industry didn’t marginalize gay stars and actors. Lil Nas X aside there are zero successful mainstream openly gay male artists. It’s still very much taboo and they will not promote you as hard. And in the film industry, which Harry is trying to break into, it’s even worse. His Eternals co-star is in a glass closet because he knows the top roles are off limits if he comes out. So for Harry to participate in that industry and literally the same movie, profit massively off of it, knowing full well how homophobic it is, and then want to say that we should be getting rid of labels is rather gross. Homophobic, even.

Edited April 26, 2022 by Headlock

[Headlock]

44 minutes ago, Protocol said:

When you are not a poet whatsoever and your lyrics about feeling sad and having sex with models are all vague boilerplate, but your whole entire image hinges on being this resurrection of a classic rocker artiste auteur, I suppose you have to create the perception of depth and subtext in whatever way you can.

You're really eating in here sis

 

[stjosephprey4us]

That’s like a white person appropriating (and profiting off) black culture, and saying “oh it’s okay bc the point is we’re supposed to be moving towards a society that doesn’t see color” like, no sweetie. You’re no David Bowie. You’re doing this for quick hits and cash, not bc it fits within your creative impulses or bc you give a damn about the LGBTQIA+ community 

[welham]

People will water down the "community" into non-existence as they scream "inclusivity!!1! stop gatekeeping!!1!", meanwhile what they're defending is **** like this

Edited April 26, 2022 by welham

[brazil]

1 hour ago, JCsNumba1Fan said:

I really, really don’t give a **** about this. He can publicly date who he wants and it still doesn’t negate that he has personally denounced being labeled straight. Y’all crack so many gay jokes, but suddenly it’s impossible for Harry Styles to have had any experiences with the same sex? So does this mean you have to be more feminine like Shawn Mendes to warrant question of your sexuality, since he exclusively dates women as well? Okay. 
 

Truthfully, the best part of Harry’s career, to me, has always been about the inclusion and representation around him, and how he promotes that. His shows are a safe place for community. He walks the walk if you look at his band (not many male artists are lacking enough ego to have women backing them). It’s not token diversity in terms of sex and race, they’re all talented and he’s lucky to have them.

Nobody is saying he has to be feminine, many queer guys are a lot more masculine than him, it's just that his history seem to be of exclusively of involvement with women. By now, at the age of 28, surely he would have had at least one know relationship with a guy. He's so eager to parade his dress code and non conformity to gender roles, yet he feels to eager to keep any relationship/experience he may have had with the same sex private? Something doesn't seems right. 

[jesus del rey]

1 hour ago, TaylorNation said:

he has a point, except that he’s being marketed, selling music and merch, making money and profiting by being “queer” or whatever 

 

which is why i’m not sure that argument applies here 

 

 

1 hour ago, Totami Legend said:

Exactly. That point is valid when It applies to normal people, not rich singers selling the fantasy and "changing the norms" for his personal gain.

 

1 hour ago, Both Sides Now said:

It’s straight privilege to say “no labels” 

 

These.

 

The issue here is that he profits from queer baiting and he is fully aware of that and still doing it purposefully. I support him wearing whatever he wants but the minute he comes up with "no labels" bs I am NOT buying it. Labels are important because this is how we can talk about certain groups of people when we need to. These "labels" bring us our pride. Having the nerve to say "no labels" is a privilege.  

 

Media and his stans are also responsible for this. They act like he is the first person ever who wears androgynous. They should get a class in queer history. 

[Johnny Jacobs]

I never get around his music cause his baiting sets me off but it works for him so he'll keep doing it