celeb news Harry defends queerbaiting

[More Than A Melody]

4 minutes ago, Communion said:

Only one of our views is based in reality, though, sis. One party is responding to the evidence in front of them; the other is hoping for an outcome based on the innuendo of the unsaid. 

I'm not hoping for any outcome. If anything, I actually hope Harry marries Olivia Wilde and they have kids soon. And I don't care if he never says he's queer. I wouldn't even care if he said he was straight. You're making a lot of assumptions not based in reality about me. I just happen to have an opinion right now, it can be challenged or confirmed in two seconds, and nothing would change for me. So what do we do now?

[chhalamars]

You people are not his public. Why do you care? 

 

And do you have that same attitude with your faves?

Edited April 26, 2022 by chhalamars

[St. Charles]

He's actually right. If you're not ******* him exclusively then get out of his business. 

[Jack!]

6 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

Musicians dressing this way is as old as musicians being huge celebs. The only difference between Harry and those people is that he's a modern celeb. Oh, and that when asked what his sexuality was he said "I don't label it"

 

Mick Jagger famously had rendezvous with David Bowie without confirming his sexuality, Steven Tyler talked about having slept with men without ever coming out, and Kurt Cobain hinted at being bisexual, none of them did a coming out interview like people demand of Harry. Because... it's just clothes... It doesn't have to mean anything about society, or about his sexuality, or about... anything other than looking cool and having some fun. Not addressing his sexuality and wearing what he wants is hardly the issue is made out to be, yet here we are.

You’re kinda missing the point of what I’m saying though, I’m literally not saying I personally have a problem with any of these men wearing these clothes or not wanting to address their sexuality/labels, but I’m still pointing out that regardless of that (and specially the part of your original post I quoted) that society does have an issue with this and more addressing the comment you made head on rather than in conjunction with Harry.

[Protocol]

15 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

Musicians dressing this way is as old as musicians being huge celebs. The only difference between Harry and those people is that he's a modern celeb. Oh, and that when asked what his sexuality was he said "I don't label it"

 

Mick Jagger famously had rendezvous with David Bowie without confirming his sexuality, Steven Tyler talked about having slept with men without ever coming out, and Kurt Cobain hinted at being bisexual, none of them did a coming out interview like people demand of Harry. Because... it's just clothes... It doesn't have to mean anything about society, or about his sexuality, or about... anything other than looking cool and having some fun. Not addressing his sexuality and wearing what he wants is hardly the issue is made out to be, yet here we are.

I agree with you that this has been a thing for a while in music, fashion, creative fields in general. Androgyny has a long history in rock. But I would also say that I don't think you can divorce Mick Jagger, David Bowie etc never confirming their sexuality from the fact that we live in a homophobic world. No they do not owe anything to anyone. It's not a personal failing. It instead says something about society that they wouldn't ever say "yes I am attracted to men". It's impossible to divorce that from homophobia, from men living their whole lives in the closet, which was the norm in the days of Jagger/Bowie and is sadly still happening for many men. 

 

So I agree that it's their business, they don't owe anything to anyone. It also says something about society. It makes me think of creeping homophobia to hear someone refuse to admit if they are attracted to men. It's like a new closet, don't ask don't tell dressed up in language of erasing barriers and being free-spirited. Of course Harry himself is not trying to promote homophobia. I maintain that he may be a victim of it himself, there are massive financial interests and pressures attached to his career. We don't know what goes on behind closed doors. Like I pointed out earlier, his co-star in Eternals is in the closet as a result of Hollywood's strict no-leading-man rules for gay men. It's a huge open secret. So he is in that very industry that systematically keeps gay men in the closet. 

 

What I don't agree with is the idea that just because he dresses in a way he's hinting at being gay. I think nail polish and necklaces and such are coming back in general as a fashion trend for men especially in music. My issue (more like sadness) is with the OP quote which is specifically about if he's attracted to men, not how he presents himself. 

[JCsNumba1Fan]

1 hour ago, Communion said:

By this logic, everyone is assumed to have the capacity to be attracted to the same gender....which is horrifically short-sighted and removed from the reality of how peopoe experience sexualoty. 

 

One can live free of labels; they cannot live free of the reality of their attraction. 

Honestly, you’re entitled to your opinion on it, obviously. But it’s not changing over here. 

[More Than A Melody]

12 minutes ago, Jack! said:

You’re kinda missing the point of what I’m saying though, I’m literally not saying I personally have a problem with any of these men wearing these clothes or not wanting to address their sexuality/labels, but I’m still pointing out that regardless of that (and specially the part of your original post I quoted) that society does have an issue with this and more addressing the comment you made head on rather than in conjunction with Harry.

I don't understand your point at all. Artistic men have been wearing flashy flamboyant and outright feminine outfits since the world has been the world. Society obviously has an issue with that, and obviously famous men get away with stuff that non famous men don't, which is a shame because a lot of non famous men who do that are queer. Do I agree that that statement is true? Yes. Does that have anything to do with Harry Styles? No. It's a systematic issue. Putting down the famous men who do this is not gonna fix the issue lol. And acting brand new every time an artist does this is also like resetting the conversation.

 

Real people can't queerbait. Wearing feminine outfits and not wanting to disclose your sexuality isn't queerbaiting. And this entire thread and this entire tired conversation are all pointless because:

 

1. We are not advancing, we aren't solving anything. It's a wankfest of talking to each other in circles without accomplishing anything. Queer people, particularly queer people of color, will continue to be oppressed regardless of what Harry Styles wears and what he says about his sexuality.

2. We are actually wasting time and resources. This is one of those times where I come to the conclusion that the left will eat itself. There's so much focus on what sort of ideology subsects are allowed within the left that we allow the right to grow and grow and grow. For the left it's "is men wearing dresses if they don't outright say they're queer a problem?" and a million different voices of yes and no and to what degree. Meanwhile conservatives just put out their big tent and say "this is gay BOOOOO" and are done with it. So, if anything, this conversation takes us back several steps, not forward.

3. It's simply not going to affect Harry Styles. It just won't... so if that's the problem some people have: that he's successful while wearing that and not saying much, then the solution is to stop talking about him and stop consuming his music. We've had FIVE YEARS to test if having discourse around his outfits would affect his numbers. Look at any chart on any part of the world right now. The jury is out: it doesn't affect him. So why have it?

4. And mostly I wonder why have it because while it doesn't affect him IN THE SLIGHTEST it does affect others! Like, people who might see in him someone who makes them feel comfortable doing and wearing and not saying. Those people then see the backlash and will go... yeah, no nevermind, clearly I can't do that.

 

In my opinion this is a pointless conversation. The root of it makes no sense, it takes us nowhere other than backwards, it affects innocent people, and it doesn't affect the person the OP of this thread wants to affect, for instance.

 

But this all falls on deaf ears because the urge to drag and cancel and discourse will always prevail. Tis the culture we live in.

Edited April 26, 2022 by More Than A Melody

[More Than A Melody]

13 minutes ago, Protocol said:

I agree with you that this has been a thing for a while in music, fashion, creative fields in general. Androgyny has a long history in rock. But I would also say that I don't think you can divorce Mick Jagger, David Bowie etc never confirming their sexuality from the fact that we live in a homophobic world. No they do not owe anything to anyone. It's not a personal failing. It instead says something about society that they wouldn't ever say "yes I am attracted to men". It's impossible to divorce that from homophobia, from men living their whole lives in the closet, which was the norm in the days of Jagger/Bowie and is sadly still happening for many men. 

 

So I agree that it's their business, they don't owe anything to anyone. It also says something about society. It makes me think of creeping homophobia to hear someone refuse to admit if they are attracted to men. It's like a new closet, don't ask don't tell dressed up in language of erasing barriers and being free-spirited. Of course Harry himself is not trying to promote homophobia. I maintain that he may be a victim of it himself, there are massive financial interests and pressures attached to his career. We don't know what goes on behind closed doors. Like I pointed out earlier, his co-star in Eternals is in the closet as a result of Hollywood's strict no-leading-man rules for gay men. It's a huge open secret. So he is in that very industry that systematically keeps gay men in the closet. 

 

What I don't agree with is the idea that just because he dresses in a way he's hinting at being gay. I think nail polish and necklaces and such are coming back in general as a fashion trend for men especially in music. My issue (more like sadness) is with the OP quote which is specifically about if he's attracted to men, not how he presents himself. 

One of his managers is gay and was watching him perform at Coachella while making out with his boyfriend. His label bends over backwards to do whatever Harry wants to do and the other big act active in his label right now is Lil Nas X.

 

No, I don't think anyone is telling Harry what to do in terms of expressing his sexuality or not. I think it comes down to the very simply fact that he's traumatized from his years in the public eye and the horrible way in which he was treated. And also, probably, he never had a serious relationship with a man that made him question addressing the issue dead on. That's basically where I'm at in terms of him, and I think it's perfectly valid and I actually understand where he's coming from A LOT. Being asked by GQ magazine how many people you slept with at 19 years old and saying you don't want to aswer and then being told "okay then I'm gonna assume it's over 100", and all this by an adult man... Man that's GOTTA leave scars. That's literally sexual harassment.

 

I would tend to agree that less successful artists have this issue. I just don't think Harry in particular has it. In this same interview he literally said the words "I felt FREE" (after signing his solo contract). FOR SURE small artists, particularly MLM and lesbians (probs the hardest sexualities to market) have it ROUGH but I just don't think it applies to Harry.

[Alyssa Edwards]

1 hour ago, Protocol said:

Sexuality stops being invisible the second you hold another man’s hand in public.

Not this moving me a biT

 

 

 

Btw i don't think Harry is the enemy at all. I think he does WAY more good than bad for masculinity in popular culture overral. But yeah these "no label" answers tell me everything i need to know about what his mindset is.

[gatito]

so wearing nail polish and sequins is queer culture? give me a phoking break 

[Britney Jean]

His baiting never worked for me anyway 

[WildHeart]

2 hours ago, Headlock said:

"Everybody wants to be queer but nobody wants to be queer."

 

 

The meltdowns in this thread 

[Legend ReX]

Until gay sex becomes destigmatized y’all can shove your “no labels” BS somewhere.

[4Real]

Poor his delusional fans who insist in living in a reality where he is a "queer man".

[Comedor]

I don’t follow his career, but he seems supportive of the LGBT community so why the hate?

[Bethenny Frankel]

well...alright then

[Blade Runner]

Who gives a SH+T? He looks hot doing it. Like a str8 guy at the gym flexing his muscles because he knows gays love it. Give us more, king. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Blade Runner

[GhostBox]

5 hours ago, Both Sides Now said:

It’s straight privilege to say “no labels” 

 

 

[brazil]

2 hours ago, Protocol said:

It seems to me the source of tension in this thread is a misunderstanding between gender expression as queerness and sexuality. The OP quote is about Harry's sexuality, whether or not he is attracted to men, which he does not want to answer. A lot of the conversation in this thread is about how he portrays himself and how that does or doesn't imply his sexuality and/or gender expression. I personally don't think that is implying he is gay, because he does so in a pretty heterosexual context i.e. his biggest hit being Watermelon Sugar with the models in the video. And nail polish on guys and vaguely androgynous looks are becoming fashionable with straight guys particularly in music these days. It's not just him. Hell my girl friend's boyfriend, totally straight, wears nail polish from time to time. It's becoming a thing. New generation new rules and all. 

 

My issue was with the lack of a clear answer in OP article about whether or not he's gay possibly being a product of the homophobia of the music industry. It's not so much about him but about wider society. Otherwise, why why not say yes, the same way he has no problem broadcasting attraction to women. Maybe I'm totally off-base. I can't help but see the gay/homophobia side of the equation, perhaps that's my own bias.

 

I am not sure I communicated this well enough. I also regret saying "stay out of it if you're not gay/bi". I do think this is a MSM issue and it's 'our territory' so to speak, but this is a public forum after all and we all have a brain. I never ever implied that anyone is more oppressed than anyone else however. I don't agree with that and that's not the point. Different issues doesn't mean worse. I suppose the divisive rhetoric around these issues of the last several years has seeped into me, where everyone is supposed to 'stay in their lane'.

[Horizon Flame]

3 hours ago, Jack! said:

This is a difficult one, because I get what he's saying, but nothing comes without explanation or reason of support in 2022. I understand he's very happy and comfortable being what he is, and doesn't owe to anyone a "label", as ultimately that's redundant to his truth and what makes him happy. But there's plenty of real-life non-binary and/or genderqueer people who could use the vocalised support of someone who is living comfortably (?) in a space they may feel they would be comfortable in themselves.

 

 

Oh, god, enough already. 
 

9 pages on this? 

[theintriguingone]

9 pages of discussion when Harry simply said he doesn’t owe strangers an explanation on his sexuality (he’s right, btw). Harry Styles you will always be famous!

[Into The Void]

4 minutes ago, theintriguingone said:

9 pages of discussion when Harry simply said he doesn’t owe strangers an explanation on his sexuality (he’s right, btw). Harry Styles you will always be famous!

This

Its so dumb to need an explanation on anything like let people live their lives

[jakeisphat]

let this wretched hooker live his life 

[Headlock]

2 hours ago, Artistofthedecade said:

 

 

The meltdowns in this thread 

That Directioner losing their mind once again at the mere thought that they don’t stan anything more than a cishet white man who wears nail polish 

Edited April 27, 2022 by Headlock

[Headlock]

3 hours ago, Protocol said:

It seems to me the source of tension in this thread is a misunderstanding between gender expression as queerness and sexuality. The OP quote is about Harry's sexuality, whether or not he is attracted to men, which he does not want to answer. A lot of the conversation in this thread is about how he portrays himself and how that does or doesn't imply his sexuality and/or gender expression. I personally don't think that is implying he is gay, because he does so in a pretty heterosexual context i.e. his biggest hit being Watermelon Sugar with the models in the video. And nail polish on guys and vaguely androgynous looks are becoming fashionable with straight guys particularly in music these days. It's not just him. Hell my girl friend's boyfriend, totally straight, wears nail polish from time to time. It's becoming a thing. New generation new rules and all. 

 

My issue was with the lack of a clear answer in OP article about whether or not he's gay possibly being a product of the homophobia of the music industry. It's not so much about him but about wider society. Otherwise, why why not say yes, the same way he has no problem broadcasting attraction to women. Maybe I'm totally off-base. I can't help but see the gay/homophobia side of the equation, perhaps that's my own bias.

 

I am not sure I communicated this well enough. I also regret saying "stay out of it if you're not gay/bi". I do think this is a MSM issue and it's 'our territory' so to speak, but this is a public forum after all and we all have a brain. I never ever implied that anyone is more oppressed than anyone else however. I don't agree with that and that's not the point. Different issues doesn't mean worse. I suppose the divisive rhetoric around these issues of the last several years has seeped into me, where everyone is supposed to 'stay in their lane'.

It’s not your fault that a virulent Directioner borderline tried to gaslight you into thinking you were the problem in this thread when your posts all were very well written and fair. You spoke nothing but the truth, this is fully a MSM issue. Saying this doesn’t detract from WSW issues, and trying to imply as much is fully transparent and reactionary bullshit, to the point of bringing up attempted sexual assault to try and report someone to the mods for being insensitive  Someone who behaves that way is by definition not meeting your argument halfway.

 

Honestly the people who keep saying “he doesn’t owe you anything” are completely missing the point. Yes, nobody owes you an explanation of their sexuality in a vacuum, but he is literally building his brand around his vagueness on the topic. You don’t get to commercialize something for profit while not living it, hence the very valid questioning from queer people (read, MSM) as to the validity of his statements. His fanbase has created this imaginary mythos around him stemming from the Larry days that he is secretly some radical queer man living his Bowie lifestyle, when all objective evidence points to a cishet white man who dates white supermodels and sings songs about eating them out, but he wore a dress once so ~*queer*~ or whatever. And no, one unreleased song about “messing around” with “the boys and the girls” is not proof of anything. That’s the equivalent of If U Seek Amy by Britney 

Edited April 27, 2022 by Headlock