celeb news Harry Styles dragged and viral after latest interview

[Headlock]

29 minutes ago, Bussea said:

you ate or whatever slay mamas 

[Headlock]

 

22 minutes ago, Richie.Valdez said:

He is straight and that’s it. Move on. he is not baiting and he is not claiming to be something he is not. 
 

He has no obligation to fully disclose his SEXUAL life, he is an ally… why are you guys making a big deal about it? You complain when someone isn’t an ally and you complain when someone is an ally. 
 

You thirsty gays just want to continue to live in an aspirational state of mind wishing for straights to be gay. Shame on you all

I'm... not sure you get what we're talking about 

[Headlock]

40 minutes ago, swissman said:

The LGBTQ+ people who are angry at his statements have points though. If he is not straight, he's never had to live openly as queer and so likely doesn't understand the struggle that is being out, open and vulnerable to a society that very often shows they don't want you to exist. If he is straight, then he surely doesn't get it. So his statement that wishes to just not talk about sexuality because "world peace" and "no labels for anyone!" can come across as uncaring and ignorant to the many issues happening at this very moment that threaten the lives of LGBTQ+ individuals. Asking not to put labels on something is asking that his straight privilege remain (after a career full of presented heterosexuality) while simultaneously getting the attention, curiosity and "praise" for pushing queerness.

 

Similarly, the fact that he can wear a dress and be praised for it while others wear a dress and are afraid to leave the house should they face violence (which happens all the time) should not be dismissed and I think those who are upset about this situation would feel differently should his comments say more than just "let's not label me!" which also translates to "just because I wear a dress doesn't mean I'm gay" which still positions queerness as just a "label" he doesn't want on him. At the end of the day, queerness may use labels to describe the way someone feels, but looking at this as "labelling" still has a bit of the homophobic notion that one thing is worse than the other. Because "labels" do exist to describe people whose sexuality doesn't check boxes, like "pansexuality".

  

[Trent W]

1 hour ago, swissman said:

The LGBTQ+ people who are angry at his statements have points though. If he is not straight, he's never had to live openly as queer and so likely doesn't understand the struggle that is being out, open and vulnerable to a society that very often shows they don't want you to exist. If he is straight, then he surely doesn't get it. So his statement that wishes to just not talk about sexuality because "world peace" and "no labels for anyone!" can come across as uncaring and ignorant to the many issues happening at this very moment that threaten the lives of LGBTQ+ individuals. Asking not to put labels on something is asking that his straight privilege remain (after a career full of presented heterosexuality) while simultaneously getting the attention, curiosity and "praise" for pushing queerness.

 

Similarly, the fact that he can wear a dress and be praised for it while others wear a dress and are afraid to leave the house should they face violence (which happens all the time) should not be dismissed and I think those who are upset about this situation would feel differently should his comments say more than just "let's not label me!" which also translates to "just because I wear a dress doesn't mean I'm gay" which still positions queerness as just a "label" he doesn't want on him. At the end of the day, queerness may use labels to describe the way someone feels, but looking at this as "labelling" still has a bit of the homophobic notion that one thing is worse than the other. Because "labels" do exist to describe people whose sexuality doesn't check boxes, like "pansexuality".

 

You have some points, but what is he supposed to do?

 

Let’s pretend he is really straight(which we’ll never know 100%), so what isn’t he supposed to do anything as an ally? Nothing? 
 

There’s countless people using his aesthetic in the media an most of them don’t care, the ones who made it mainstream are him and bad bunny

 

If he is queer he is just living his life without label, which imo is the ideal state in society.

 

BTW there’s a lot of us who don’t want labels too. I hate them.

 

 

[saintspice]

he queer baits so hard and it has NOTHING to do with him wearing dresses and painting his nailshe refused to clarify whether he is an ally or part of the community and that is what the issue is!!! no one is saying he has to release a gay sex tape to prove it to us, all he has to do is clarify that statement. and until he does that he’s gonna get backlash from the lgbtq+ community over it. this whole sexual ambiguity seems like a cash grab at this point, because if he was really queer and supportive, why not EMBRACE THE LABEL?!!! is he ashamed to be apart if the community? profit without participation? i’ve been a fan of his since 1D days but it’s getting to the point where it’s super annoying

[swissman]

13 minutes ago, Trent W said:

 

You have some points, but what is he supposed to do?

 

Let’s pretend he is really straight(which we’ll never know 100%), so what isn’t he supposed to do anything as an ally? Nothing? 
 

There’s countless people using his aesthetic in the media an most of them don’t care, the ones who made it mainstream are him and bad bunny

 

If he is queer he is just living his life without label, which imo is the ideal state in society.

 

BTW there’s a lot of us who don’t want labels too. I hate them.

 

 

Well maybe I am not fully versed on what he's done as an ally, but simply saying "don't label me" or wearing women's clothing isn't imo what defines an ally, rather it's someone who sticks up for the group they're allies with, promotes people in that community, doesn't try to be the most visible one or take the light from others, and if they do, to simultaneously share it or use it in a way that is less about oneself. Maybe he's done that already?

 

 

People may not like labels, but I do think advocating to not talk about "labels" or "sexuality" feeds into a larger "I'm fine with gay people but I don't need to hear about it" trope that many straight people say thinking they're being open minded but really just asking for invisibility of certain identities so that their straight fragility isn't broken, and heteronormativity is maintained.

 

And because heteronormativity is the default, it's great to say "no labels!" but for the most part, people are labelled as straight unless they say or act otherwise. And since being straight is a label, I don't think we can fully escape them until those whose labels are seen as less-than are fully accepted. Any attempt to stop labelling beforehand only serves to never get those who need respect that which they lack.

 

As you probably know, in Florida right now, they just banned talking about sexuality (homosexuality) in schools for certain ages, as one example. They say this is about "all forms of sexuality" but prior to homosexuality was a topic, there was never this discussion even in more conservative times because the discussion of heterosexual life was never a label deemed "harmful".

SO all in all, I think there maybe is an unfair spotlight on Harry but also I think it's fair to critique what he does say about gender/sexuality as the spotlight is on him and if he does have influence, we should hope it promotes a forward march for everyone, not just those whose "lack of labels" make no difference.

[Miichael]

4 hours ago, Headlock said:

I beg of you, read what I am providing to you. This is not about the "fashion and art world" 

 

I have lost track of how many times I have said this isn't about a ******* dress. You are continuing to disingenuously engage in this conversation, because you continuously prove you are not ******* reading what I am writing by say saying **** like this over and over.

 

I want you to really understand what you are actually doing when you keep demoting others' valid rebuttals as "fuming". You are negating the very well explained and thought out words from queer people, at the expense of someone who is not queer. You are upholding the majority at the expense of the minority. You are minimizing the frustrations of the marginalized to prop up the financial gain of those in power.

 

Mythology is not reality. Vague words are not evidence. All objective reality in this situation points to one conclusion. The burden of proof is on you and all who continue to defend Harry, not us.

 

You have continously said we can't decide who is in the queer community. For one, nobody said that (which you already know), and two, there is one objective barrier: heterosexuality.

 

4 hours ago, Headlock said:

You just contradicted yourself. You said we have no right to determine if someone if queer or not, implying the Harry is in fact under the queer umbrella. You then say that "dresses and feminine accessories" don't belong the the queer community, which then implies you believe Harry isn't a part of the community. This means you think is is straight.

 

It's almost as if you don't know what you are talking about 

 

Once again, more essays of bullshit where you show that you think you own being queer and that you have the right to dictate how others identify. Grow up and come into the real world

[Miichael]

4 hours ago, Headlock said:

"Queer people want to be victims to the straight white man so badly" 

No they don’t, because thankfully you don’t represent queer people. Don’t give yourself that much credit. We aren’t a monolith, you don’t speak for us

[Into The Void]

this was made the day before  

 

 

[More Than A Melody]

49 minutes ago, swissman said:

Well maybe I am not fully versed on what he's done as an ally, but simply saying "don't label me" or wearing women's clothing isn't imo what defines an ally, rather it's someone who sticks up for the group they're allies with, promotes people in that community, doesn't try to be the most visible one or take the light from others, and if they do, to simultaneously share it or use it in a way that is less about oneself. Maybe he's done that already?

(check date of tweet above)

Quote

And since being straight is a label

 

I mean, that's the point isn't it? People are acting like when he says he doesn't use labels it just means he doesn't pick queer labels, therefore he's straight, when... that's not the case at all. No labels also includes "straight" hence he is not straight. That is what he is saying, no matter how much the main poster in this thread wants to argue against it.

 

Look at the things this man has done (this is a fifth of what he's actually done, but you get the gist), how his team and his group of friends is literally filled to the brim with queer people - and not in a way of "I have gay friends" but more like... if he was "profiting off..." would he have THAT many queer friends riding for him? I personally wouldn't! But what do I know.

 

There's the fact that he constantly champions queer artists (by recommending their music to the masses, like it happened with King Princess, or by taking them on tour with him when they're nowhere near audience draws like MUNA). He champions queer designers, like Harris Reed, Palomo Spain, SS Daley, even when they're still up and coming. Harris Reed was literally still in school when Harry commissioned him to do tour outfits. And Harry paid him, handsomely... most big artists just say "I'll pay you with exposure".

 

There's all the times he expressed being attracted to men/multiple genders, such as when he said "don't knock it till you try it" about sleeping with men, or "not that important" about the gender of his partner, both things that happened in 2014. In 2017 he did an interview where they measured his heartbeat while showing him photos, they showed him a shirtless picture of Ryan Gosling and the joke was that his heartbeat had risen stupidly high. It became A Thing, and Ryan Gosling was even asked about it. Harry was asked multiple times and he played along until eventually he said, and I quote "he's a handsome man, I'm not ashamed". Which... goes a little above and beyond just playing along for a joke.

 

There was his best friend Tom Hull, in Harry's 2019 Rolling Stone interview, quoting Iggy Pop's "date women who will f*ck you up" and switching it specifically for Harry and saying "you're 25, in the eligible bachelor category, date women, or men, or whatever, who will f*ck you up."

 

There's Harry saying he feels "supported" by his friends and family, so of course he wants to create an environment where fans feel supported as well (do straight people feel "supported" in their sexuality? ) There's obviously Medicine, which you can't just dismiss as "meaningless lyrics" when this quote:

 

Quote

On his first solo tour, he frequently waved the pride, bi, and trans flags, along with the Black Lives Matter flag. In Philly, he waved a rainbow flag he borrowed from a fan up front: “Make America Gay Again.” One of the live fan favorites: “Medicine,” a guitar jam that sounds a bit like the Grateful Dead circa Europe ’72, but with a flamboyantly pansexual hook: “The boys and girls are in/I mess around with them/And I’m OK with it.”

was personally vetted by Harry Styles himself

 

Him saying he's "very open" with his friends about his sexual identity... something straight people literally don't say because why tf would they.

 

Basically, people here are arguing two possible points:

 

1. He's using "queer aesthetics" aka, rainbows, pink, sparkles, etc, without saying explicitly that he's queer, therefore he's queerbaiting. Which... is... ridiculous because multiple straight artists use so called "queer aesthetics", particularly women (Kacey Musgraves, Katy Perry, even Taylor Swift) and rockstars (Steven Tyler, Mick Jagger, Prince, Bowie who walked back his statements, Kurt Cobain, Kid Rock), and this discourse didn't exist until recently. Nowadays everything that isn't explicitly straight: re masculine for men and femme for women, is called queerbaiting. Men being affectionate with male friends is called queerbaiting. Girls saying "I love girls" is called queerbaiting. It's such a regressive attitude. It's like we did a 180 switch and then continue switching and landed in 360.

 

2. He is asked about his sexuality, which is invasive and shouldn't happen, and doesn't explicitly say he's queer, but also doesn't say he's straight. You should never be asked if you are ____ sexuality. Regardless of what you do, you just shouldn't. You should be allowed to choose if and how and when you address it and it's no one's business other than yours what you identify as. This is the same principle as "innocent until proven guilty". If you accuse everyone of queerbaiting unless explicitly queer, you are undoubtedly going accuse a queer person who isn't ready to come out of queerbaiting. That's just math. So why don't we just... stop?

 

And I'll leave with this final thought, this entire interview was SO MUCH MORE than the tiny quote that's been extracted to "drag him". He talked about a lot of things that happened to him while he was a teenager that completely traumatized him, including the conversation surrounding his sex life and how it was treated and addressed, even when he was a minor. He said he had to reckon with that recently and treat it with his therapist. But there's zero consideration for what a teenage boy, 16 years old, had to go through. The fact that THAT is the frame in which he said he doesn't want to share his sexuality has been completely erased from the discourse.

 

He said that because he had no privacy growing up and his baby photos are all online and people used to ask him directly about his body count, he wants to shield as much as he can about certain parts of his life and that includes his sexuality. The fact that people are erasing what the media did to him, or that there's been a culture of fans discussing his sex life and sexuality since he was sixteen in the context of him not wanting to make specific statements about his sexuality, is so harmful. It's literally reframing everything he said to justify the thirst for information that doesn't belong to them. He's a human being, flesh and bones. Yes, he makes money, but that doesn't make him any less human. Representation and thirst for information should never be above an individual's mental health.

 

The fact that this thread is allowed to still be open is frankly really really sad for me. I would hope moderators would read the entire context of the interview and realize that the conversation has been taken out of context and shouldn't be allowed in this frame. But... @Juanny@MissedTheTrain@Ryan BTE

[Headlock]

1 hour ago, Miichael said:

 

Once again, more essays of bullshit where you show that you think you own being queer and that you have the right to dictate how others identify. Grow up and come into the real world

How do you deal with conflict in your daily life? Do you perpetually run away with your fingers in your ears like you're doing now? How does that work out for you?

Since you've been a member on this site since 2010 and I doubt you were on here as a 10 year old, that would mean you're in your mid 20s, which is terrifying given both your lack of skill in real debate and counter-arguments, and in your lack of education surrounding the community you belong to.

 

Things to think about next time you ponder potentially doing some work on yourself.

1 hour ago, Miichael said:

No they don’t, because thankfully you don’t represent queer people. Don’t give yourself that much credit. We aren’t a monolith, you don’t speak for us

Gia Gunn there's room for everybody gif 

It is really quite entertaining to see you try and squirm around the objective truth that in order to be a part of the queer community, you have to be queer. That's kind of the entire concept around communities in general.

[Headlock]

18 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

(check date of tweet above)

 

I mean, that's the point isn't it? People are acting like when he says he doesn't use labels it just means he doesn't pick queer labels, therefore he's straight, when... that's not the case at all. No labels also includes "straight" hence he is not straight. That is what he is saying, no matter how much the main poster in this thread wants to argue against it.

 

Look at the things this man has done (this is a fifth of what he's actually done, but you get the gist), how his team and his group of friends is literally filled to the brim with queer people - and not in a way of "I have gay friends" but more like... if he was "profiting off..." would he have THAT many queer friends riding for him? I personally wouldn't! But what do I know.

 

There's the fact that he constantly champions queer artists (by recommending their music to the masses, like it happened with King Princess, or by taking them on tour with him when they're nowhere near audience draws like MUNA). He champions queer designers, like Harris Reed, Palomo Spain, SS Daley, even when they're still up and coming. Harris Reed was literally still in school when Harry commissioned him to do tour outfits. And Harry paid him, handsomely... most big artists just say "I'll pay you with exposure".

 

There's all the times he expressed being attracted to men/multiple genders, such as when he said "don't knock it till you try it" about sleeping with men, or "not that important" about the gender of his partner, both things that happened in 2014. In 2017 he did an interview where they measured his heartbeat while showing him photos, they showed him a shirtless picture of Ryan Gosling and the joke was that his heartbeat had risen stupidly high. It became A Thing, and Ryan Gosling was even asked about it. Harry was asked multiple times and he played along until eventually he said, and I quote "he's a handsome man, I'm not ashamed". Which... goes a little above and beyond just playing along for a joke.

 

There was his best friend Tom Hull, in Harry's 2019 Rolling Stone interview, quoting Iggy Pop's "date women who will f*ck you up" and switching it specifically for Harry and saying "you're 25, in the eligible bachelor category, date women, or men, or whatever, who will f*ck you up."

 

There's Harry saying he feels "supported" by his friends and family, so of course he wants to create an environment where fans feel supported as well (do straight people feel "supported" in their sexuality? ) There's obviously Medicine, which you can't just dismiss as "meaningless lyrics" when this quote:

 

was personally vetted by Harry Styles himself

 

Him saying he's "very open" with his friends about his sexual identity... something straight people literally don't say because why tf would they.

 

Basically, people here are arguing two possible points:

 

1. He's using "queer aesthetics" aka, rainbows, pink, sparkles, etc, without saying explicitly that he's queer, therefore he's queerbaiting. Which... is... ridiculous because multiple straight artists use so called "queer aesthetics", particularly women (Kacey Musgraves, Katy Perry, even Taylor Swift) and rockstars (Steven Tyler, Mick Jagger, Prince, Bowie who walked back his statements, Kurt Cobain, Kid Rock), and this discourse didn't exist until recently. Nowadays everything that isn't explicitly straight: re masculine for men and femme for women, is called queerbaiting. Men being affectionate with male friends is called queerbaiting. Girls saying "I love girls" is called queerbaiting. It's such a regressive attitude. It's like we did a 180 switch and then continue switching and landed in 360.

 

2. He is asked about his sexuality, which is invasive and shouldn't happen, and doesn't explicitly say he's queer, but also doesn't say he's straight. You should never be asked if you are ____ sexuality. Regardless of what you do, you just shouldn't. You should be allowed to choose if and how and when you address it and it's no one's business other than yours what you identify as. This is the same principle as "innocent until proven guilty". If you accuse everyone of queerbaiting unless explicitly queer, you are undoubtedly going accuse a queer person who isn't ready to come out of queerbaiting. That's just math. So why don't we just... stop?

 

And I'll leave with this final thought, this entire interview was SO MUCH MORE than the tiny quote that's been extracted to "drag him". He talked about a lot of things that happened to him while he was a teenager that completely traumatized him, including the conversation surrounding his sex life and how it was treated and addressed, even when he was a minor. He said he had to reckon with that recently and treat it with his therapist. But there's zero consideration for what a teenage boy, 16 years old, had to go through. The fact that THAT is the frame in which he said he doesn't want to share his sexuality has been completely erased from the discourse.

 

He said that because he had no privacy growing up and his baby photos are all online and people used to ask him directly about his body count, he wants to shield as much as he can about certain parts of his life and that includes his sexuality. The fact that people are erasing what the media did to him, or that there's been a culture of fans discussing his sex life and sexuality since he was sixteen in the context of him not wanting to make specific statements about his sexuality, is so harmful. It's literally reframing everything he said to justify the thirst for information that doesn't belong to them. He's a human being, flesh and bones. Yes, he makes money, but that doesn't make him any less human. Representation and thirst for information should never be above an individual's mental health.

 

The fact that this thread is allowed to still be open is frankly really really sad for me. I would hope moderators would read the entire context of the interview and realize that the conversation has been taken out of context and shouldn't be allowed in this frame. But... @Juanny@MissedTheTrain@Ryan BTE

Is he an ally or not? Because by definition an ally is someone who is not a part of the community they are supporting 

 

18 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

The fact that this thread is allowed to still be open is frankly really really sad for me. I would hope moderators would read the entire context of the interview and realize that the conversation has been taken out of context and shouldn't be allowed in this frame. But... @Juanny@MissedTheTrain@Ryan BTE

Edited April 28, 2022 by Headlock

[Headlock]

2 hours ago, saintspice said:

 profit without participation?

This, I like this 

[NausAllien]

3 minutes ago, Headlock said:

How do you deal with conflict in your daily life? Do you perpetually run away with your fingers in your ears like you're doing now? How does that work out for you?

Since you've been a member on this site since 2010 and I doubt you were on here as a 10 year old, that would mean you're in your mid 20s, which is terrifying given both your lack of skill in real debate and counter-arguments, and in your lack of education surrounding the community you belong to.

 

I gave up trying to have a coherent exchange of ideas with that user. He's either blinded by his fanaticism, or lacks the necessary skills to put forward well-thought-out arguments. It's like trying to have an argument with a toddler, if I'm being honest.

[More Than A Melody]

4 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Is he an ally or not? Because by definition an ally is someone who is not a part of the community they are supporting 

 

I say this without any sort of shade intended, I really hope whatever makes you be this aggressive gets better. It must be awful if it makes you be this aggressive towards everyone in every thread, and I truly feel bad for you.

 

Have a nice day.

[Gui Blackout]

The "receipts" posted on this page nnnn;nsk

it's giving

 

Edited April 28, 2022 by Gui Blackout

[Headlock]

1 minute ago, More Than A Melody said:

I say this without any sort of shade intended, I really hope whatever makes you be this aggressive gets better. It must be awful if it makes you be this aggressive towards everyone in every thread, and I truly feel bad for you.

 

Have a nice day.

Why is it that every Harry Styles stan reverts to comments like this when faced with valid arguments surrounding this topic? None of you can ever actually answer any of the questions people are asking of you. It all becomes about us "fuming", or being "aggressive". And none of you seem to get what you're doing when you say this. You are attempting to demoralize queer people for the sake of a wealthy straight white man. DO you not see the issue with that? Can you put aside whatever stan feelings you have for this dude and actually evaluate your behavior?

 

This is less general, but it is *chef's kiss* that I am being talked down to by a Directioner perpetually stuck in 2012 and who trolls every single Taylor thread, and who runs to the mods when they've run out of ammo 

But nice attempt at a "bless your heart" moment, it was amusing to read.

[swissman]

17 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

(check date of tweet above)

 

I mean, that's the point isn't it? People are acting like when he says he doesn't use labels it just means he doesn't pick queer labels, therefore he's straight, when... that's not the case at all. No labels also includes "straight" hence he is not straight. That is what he is saying, no matter how much the main poster in this thread wants to argue against it.

 

Look at the things this man has done (this is a fifth of what he's actually done, but you get the gist), how his team and his group of friends is literally filled to the brim with queer people - and not in a way of "I have gay friends" but more like... if he was "profiting off..." would he have THAT many queer friends riding for him? I personally wouldn't! But what do I know.

 

There's the fact that he constantly champions queer artists (by recommending their music to the masses, like it happened with King Princess, or by taking them on tour with him when they're nowhere near audience draws like MUNA). He champions queer designers, like Harris Reed, Palomo Spain, SS Daley, even when they're still up and coming. Harris Reed was literally still in school when Harry commissioned him to do tour outfits. And Harry paid him, handsomely... most big artists just say "I'll pay you with exposure".

 

There's all the times he expressed being attracted to men/multiple genders, such as when he said "don't knock it till you try it" about sleeping with men, or "not that important" about the gender of his partner, both things that happened in 2014. In 2017 he did an interview where they measured his heartbeat while showing him photos, they showed him a shirtless picture of Ryan Gosling and the joke was that his heartbeat had risen stupidly high. It became A Thing, and Ryan Gosling was even asked about it. Harry was asked multiple times and he played along until eventually he said, and I quote "he's a handsome man, I'm not ashamed". Which... goes a little above and beyond just playing along for a joke.

 

There was his best friend Tom Hull, in Harry's 2019 Rolling Stone interview, quoting Iggy Pop's "date women who will f*ck you up" and switching it specifically for Harry and saying "you're 25, in the eligible bachelor category, date women, or men, or whatever, who will f*ck you up."

 

There's Harry saying he feels "supported" by his friends and family, so of course he wants to create an environment where fans feel supported as well (do straight people feel "supported" in their sexuality? ) There's obviously Medicine, which you can't just dismiss as "meaningless lyrics" when this quote:

 

was personally vetted by Harry Styles himself

 

Him saying he's "very open" with his friends about his sexual identity... something straight people literally don't say because why tf would they.

 

Basically, people here are arguing two possible points:

 

1. He's using "queer aesthetics" aka, rainbows, pink, sparkles, etc, without saying explicitly that he's queer, therefore he's queerbaiting. Which... is... ridiculous because multiple straight artists use so called "queer aesthetics", particularly women (Kacey Musgraves, Katy Perry, even Taylor Swift) and rockstars (Steven Tyler, Mick Jagger, Prince, Bowie who walked back his statements, Kurt Cobain, Kid Rock), and this discourse didn't exist until recently. Nowadays everything that isn't explicitly straight: re masculine for men and femme for women, is called queerbaiting. Men being affectionate with male friends is called queerbaiting. Girls saying "I love girls" is called queerbaiting. It's such a regressive attitude. It's like we did a 180 switch and then continue switching and landed in 360.

 

2. He is asked about his sexuality, which is invasive and shouldn't happen, and doesn't explicitly say he's queer, but also doesn't say he's straight. You should never be asked if you are ____ sexuality. Regardless of what you do, you just shouldn't. You should be allowed to choose if and how and when you address it and it's no one's business other than yours what you identify as. This is the same principle as "innocent until proven guilty". If you accuse everyone of queerbaiting unless explicitly queer, you are undoubtedly going accuse a queer person who isn't ready to come out of queerbaiting. That's just math. So why don't we just... stop?

 

And I'll leave with this final thought, this entire interview was SO MUCH MORE than the tiny quote that's been extracted to "drag him". He talked about a lot of things that happened to him while he was a teenager that completely traumatized him, including the conversation surrounding his sex life and how it was treated and addressed, even when he was a minor. He said he had to reckon with that recently and treat it with his therapist. But there's zero consideration for what a teenage boy, 16 years old, had to go through. The fact that THAT is the frame in which he said he doesn't want to share his sexuality has been completely erased from the discourse.

 

He said that because he had no privacy growing up and his baby photos are all online and people used to ask him directly about his body count, he wants to shield as much as he can about certain parts of his life and that includes his sexuality. The fact that people are erasing what the media did to him, or that there's been a culture of fans discussing his sex life and sexuality since he was sixteen in the context of him not wanting to make specific statements about his sexuality, is so harmful. It's literally reframing everything he said to justify the thirst for information that doesn't belong to them. He's a human being, flesh and bones. Yes, he makes money, but that doesn't make him any less human. Representation and thirst for information should never be above an individual's mental health.

 

The fact that this thread is allowed to still be open is frankly really really sad for me. I would hope moderators would read the entire context of the interview and realize that the conversation has been taken out of context and shouldn't be allowed in this frame. But... @Juanny@MissedTheTrain@Ryan BTE

Thanks for sharing all these receipts. I definitely didn't know about the extent of them, and it does change my outlook on the matter for the most part.

 

I do understand though why some queer people are bothered by his quote (especially out of context and even within content). His answer could've been clearer to what he wanted to say which is "none of your business" rather than making the case that actually we should aim to not define anyone (in a time when queer people's existence is still very much under attack even in more open places where modern queer liberation started, like the U.S., it can sound like an oversimplified solution to a real issue), especially since he's only ever benefitted from a "straight" [ally] label through his public dating history and presentation of heterosexuality through lyrics and videos, while many other people don't get a chance to be coy and ambiguous. For many, their identity is automatically known or assumed without having to declare it, without questions asked.

 

Overall, I do get what you're saying though and thanks for taking the time to write it all out.

[Into The Void]

15 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Why is it that every Harry Styles stan reverts to comments like this when faced with valid arguments surrounding this topic? None of you can ever actually answer any of the questions people are asking of you. It all becomes about us "fuming", or being "aggressive". And none of you seem to get what you're doing when you say this. You are attempting to demoralize queer people for the sake of a wealthy straight white man. DO you not see the issue with that? Can you put aside whatever stan feelings you have for this dude and actually evaluate your behavior?

 

This is less general, but it is *chef's kiss* that I am being talked down to by a Directioner perpetually stuck in 2012 and who trolls every single Taylor thread, and who runs to the mods when they've run out of ammo 

But nice attempt at a "bless your heart" moment, it was amusing to read.

Whats the question?

[Miichael]

38 minutes ago, Headlock said:

How do you deal with conflict in your daily life? Do you perpetually run away with your fingers in your ears like you're doing now? How does that work out for you?

Since you've been a member on this site since 2010 and I doubt you were on here as a 10 year old, that would mean you're in your mid 20s, which is terrifying given both your lack of skill in real debate and counter-arguments, and in your lack of education surrounding the community you belong to.

 

Things to think about next time you ponder potentially doing some work on yourself.

Gia Gunn there's room for everybody gif 

It is really quite entertaining to see you try and squirm around the objective truth that in order to be a part of the queer community, you have to be queer. That's kind of the entire concept around communities in general.

Your futile attempts at insults are just embarassing  My point has been very clear, you don’t own queerness as a concept and you don’t get to dictate if someone is queer or not because they haven’t come out, and you don’t get to demand that someone comes out because of the way they dress. You struggle to understand boundaries and the way real life works outside of the SJW corners of the internet. You don’t like that dose of reality, so you resort to pathetic insults because you are struggling to make an argument. Not my problem.  You resort to desperate attempts at calling someone “uneducated” meanwhile linking to Wikipedia articles and Vogue articles about the concept of camp as an art form that has nothing to do with what we are discussing. You continue to fume about not having clarity on the sexual orientation of a total stranger because you object to their aesthetic appearance, and ham-fisted arguments about “white people profiting from queerness”, while stanning straight white pop girls that have marketed themselves to the queer community since the start of their careers. The jokes write themselves. You clearly are quite committed to your ignorance and don’t know how to cope with your delusions being shattered so I can’t help you any further. Now please have a good day

[Digitalism]

All of this discussion from someone using the community

Is it that hard to say he is a straight queer man? But he doesn't because he knows he will loose some support.  All of his image  is just a big PR stunt and you keep falling for it 

What I don't understant is the homophobia in the community.  Why aren't we more supportive of queer lgbt people and keep praising and defending this man? What have he done for the community that it better than other queer lgbt people?

Edited April 28, 2022 by Digitalism
Typo

[Protocol]

42 minutes ago, Gui Blackout said:

The "receipts" posted on this page nnnn;nsk

it's giving

 

Still waiting on that statement about Florida. Even Shawn Mendes commented. It’s all well and good to say happy pride and do some merch donations to organizations, but a highly controversial issue in the media, when you are now  a major major star, and when it could actually maybe hurt you a teensy bit….That’s what separates those who just talk from those who walk the walk.

[J-esper]

I would call myself a Harry fan. But this quote seems a bit tone deaf. I don't care who he falls in love with, I don't care who he sleeps with. But he is a white privlidged wealthy man. He is able to hide behind vague statements and he is able to stay vague and keep his sexuality to himself because of his position.

 

Labels are still important for LGBTQ+ people. Not only for visibility but also to create clarity for our environment and to protect ourselves. I am a white gay cis man, but I have been discriminated against just for the sole fact for being gay. The amount of times I heard I "wouldn't fit in a men filled environment" or something around those lines during job interviews.  And I can't imagine the fear trans people live in and sometimes have to tell their truth and disclose their labels just to be able to have safe environments.

 

And we are also far from heading into the direction of not having to define, talk or disclose labels. In loads of countries same sex marriage is still not allowed, in loads of countries people get murdered, stoned to death or just completely dissapear once their are out or are outed. Trans people still can't get the proper health care in loads of countries.

 

The world is a sh*t hole and it is easy to talk from your iron tower, but in reality there are 1000s of LGBTQ+ people who still need to define themselves to be able to live their lives, to get certain oppertunties, to not be taken advantage of or to just be able to escape certain situations.

 

His intensions probably were from a good place, but sometimes it is better to just reflect and adjust what you are planning to say

[NausAllien]

8 minutes ago, Digitalism said:

Is it that hard to say he is a straight queer man?

This is LITERALLY an oxymoron. He's either straight OR queer. He can't be both.

[Archetype]

2 minutes ago, Protocol said:

One question is why is it not grossly homophobic of Harry Styles to say that we should be moving towards a world with no labels when he is actively participating in an industry, Marvel movies, that forces gay actors to be closeted in order to maximize their profits?

You cannot be serious when you say grossly homophobic 

Imagine being THAT offended by someone becoming an ACTOR.  Marvel is just *one* of the many incredibly popular movie studios that does and has done this.  Hell, most record labels still force and encourage this.  Is it wrong?  Yes.  Does that make all of our faves grossly homophobic because they decide to have a... career?