The Thread for Discussion about Models & Celebrities Sexuality

[mikyang]

It baffles me how having a voice on a thread within a platform that has a very wide scope of interest among diverse groups can result in such infighting. Perhaps few remember the history of Hollywood, or are in the same Queen of DeNile barge as what Hollywood always covered... a base of largely homosexual actors who if not gay themselves were certainly in the thick of it in any related social setting there.

Henry Willson was impressive in his ability to extract sex in exchange for his ability to catapult male stars into idols of the silver screen with his many clients... including Rock Hudson, Tab Hunter, Chad Everett, Robert Wagner, Nick Adams, Guy Madison, Kerwin Mathews, Troy Donahue, Mike Connors, Rory Calhoun, John Saxon, Yale Summers, Clint Walker, Doug McClure, Dack Rambo, Ty Hardin, and John Derek.
(links to Wikipedia). Henry notoriously made sex with him a scaled condition of placement.

View attachment 124499861

Cary Grant was absolutely open with his attraction to Randolph Scott, but as he was married to a woman most of the day ignored it. Except for the gossip Hollywood insider rags, of course.

Though married (often beards, sometimes not), stars like Paul Newman, James Dean (a favorite toy of Marlon Brando) and many, many others came through their initiations to land where they did.

Casting by sex in fact was far more heavily weighted to homosexuality than casting agents asking sex of female bombshells, which dates back to the roaring 20's when film was young, and homosexual sex was extremely common, not hidden, and even celebrated among celebrities at lavish flapper parties.

If you have any doubts, do a little digging. The true histories of Hollywood hunks makes for some very interesting reading.

Dont think they had a name back then. Like Marlon brando and Richard pryor too hot guys in there youth looking for girls oh well we can suck eachother off its not gay


I dont know about that but it is mentioned Richard and Marlon did have a fling

 

[8Cylinder]

Dont think they had a name back then. Like Marlon brando and Richard pryor too hot guys in there youth looking for girls oh well we can suck eachother off its not gay


I dont know about that but it is mentioned Richard and Marlon did have a fling

Marlon Brando was very much into dominating James Dean heavily, leaning toward S&M, and obviously James Dean was into it. There were enough people present to document the situation well, and all of these histories were open secrets among those inside Hollywood.

 

[Rafael_Branco]

unpopular opinion: Utterly stupid phrase. Same goes for "ally". Another one I can't stand.

I admit that the expression I mentioned is purposefully ambiguous, the function of this expression is to escape unwanted results, it is a model of verbal mathematics.

 

[l3moning]

unpopular opinion: Utterly stupid phrase. Same goes for "ally". Another one I can't stand.

I think ally is fine, but it has to be earned. You don't get to call yourself an ally just because you're not homophobic.

 

[mikyang]

I think ally is fine, but it has to be earned. You don't get to call yourself an ally just because you're not homophobic.

haha thats how it works

 

[qavak0]

Someone's read a little too much Kenneth Anger.

 

[colorfulkent]

Except that a lot of people on this site think that every celebrity they're attracted to is gay. It's usually not based on anything other than wishful thinking.

so getting mis-identified is not life threatening. I get mis-identified as straight all the time. I think celebrities can handle being mistaken for being queer.

 

[colorfulkent]

View attachment 104811281 Same thing so stop making excuses! A gay sexual orientation is not something every gay person is comfortable sharing to the world for various reasons: fear, shame, non-acceptance from family, work, public scrutiny, personal privacy, confusion of identity, name it! Just because you're out and proud, everyone's personal circumstances vary so you have NO RIGHT to put anyone in that situation!

But who are you to put people in the closet. If they want to be in the closet, I am sure they can hold that door themselves, without you. I assume everyone is out and proud, unless they signal to me otherwise. Even them I have no obligation to keep other people's secrets. If I know, then it probably isn't a secret. It's just not talked about and that's not the same thing.

 

[colorfulkent]

Them being straight was actually a WIN. BUT what's disappointing was they had to be paired with real gay guys and engage in gay scenes with them.. I find that EXPLOITATIVE! If they want to have a gay couple in a TV show, why don't they pair two real gay/flamboyant actors? I bet you, those two gay/queer actors wouldn't want each other as a partner (unless they're both incredibly hot) because they'd rather be paired with a hot straight actor to kiss and do love scenes with for the show.

this board needs a Dis-like button sometimes.

 

[colorfulkent]

Sorry to burst your bubble but these are the times where you really have to respect people's identity, preference and privacy. That's common decency, not a Gen Z thing. Don't act as if the world has never or will never put insult, shame, ridicule about gay/LGBTQ people.. so if someone does not want to come out, it's not your business to out them. And if someone is indeed straight, you're only making a desperate fool of yourself to insist they're gay or not straight.

not your business to "in" them.

 

[8Cylinder]

Celebrity society has changed over the years. During the 1920's, it was seriously exaggerated the other direction. Have a look at the art from the era. Men with men, women, orgies that disregarded gender... roaring 20's indeed.

"Coming Out" is a new perspective, due to society's knee-jerk reaction to the absolutely extreme tolerance of that time. Like all history, the pendulum swung the other way. During the 1930's and 1940's Hollywood still had a distinct homosexual center that lasted to the present day. The only question was whether you needed an umbrella in that decade to go out into the society rain. So check the weather, and you decide... umbrella, boots and raincoat or naked and celebrative. If you choose the latter, people may celebrate your freedom or brand you insane.

I submit to you we have not moved that much forward in inner truth and honesty, rather shifted the table as to who must stay in the closet with their own truth. It's not an attractive characteristic, period. In fact, if bigots can't speak up and be honest about how they feel, we'll never know who they are and how to deal with them. The more we practice what they did, forcing attitudes, opinions and behaviors only in our direction, the more we risk a backlash and another swing of the pendulum into the world of the 40's and 50's... hiding everything for fear of oppression.

The perspective that one must "identify" or brand themselves I find absurd. While it is absolutely an individual stance that every human takes in how much of their lives to reveal to others, the current trend is to create a ridiculous level of stress to comply with the new "norm". So I'd like to know which comedic, bossy queen waved this wand and decreed that I must, after 68 successful years on the planet, no longer be surprised, dismayed, unapproving, or of a unique and individual opinion in any single thing, complying to this new and erroneous homogenizing decree.

So let's be fair. If you or I or anyone tells any person for whatever reason that they must not live their truth, then you or I or anyone are forcing someone to live a lie. Presenting facts without accusation and from your individual perspective is how anyone can learn... but you can absolutely learn from them in the same way. That is, unless in school and life it was only you teaching others how to think and live in your supreme superiority.

I will never sport a forehead tattoo with an added letter every few months declaring I treat all fairly. It's as if a hetero individual were to wear a neon flashing sign that kept people up nights "I fuck my wife in the ass while she reads Shakespeare. Equal rights for Shakespeare buttfuckers!!"

The school story of a father storming into the school admin office demanding his daughter who identifies as a cat be allowed to have a litter box under her desk at school... and SUCCEEDED. Puh-leeeeeeeeze, Agnes Ridiculous, if I had children in school (given I'm paying for it anyway and will never utilize these asylums of dementia), I'd insist my child identifies as a privileged, wealthy bully, and therefore can only be taught while sipping champagne in his Ferrari. It's his right to be an individual and live his truth.

Let's stop being such total hypocrites and practice what we preach. Then the world would truly be a beautiful place.

 

[mikyang]

Celebrity society has changed over the years. During the 1920's, it was seriously exaggerated the other direction. Have a look at the art from the era. Men with men, women, orgies that disregarded gender... roaring 20's indeed.

"Coming Out" is a new perspective, due to society's knee-jerk reaction to the absolutely extreme tolerance of that time. Like all history, the pendulum swung the other way. During the 1930's and 1940's Hollywood still had a distinct homosexual center that lasted to the present day. The only question was whether you needed an umbrella in that decade to go out into the society rain. So check the weather, and you decide... umbrella, boots and raincoat or naked and celebrative. If you choose the latter, people may celebrate your freedom or brand you insane.

I submit to you we have not moved that much forward in inner truth and honesty, rather shifted the table as to who must stay in the closet with their own truth. It's not an attractive characteristic, period. In fact, if bigots can't speak up and be honest about how they feel, we'll never know who they are and how to deal with them. The more we practice what they did, forcing attitudes, opinions and behaviors only in our direction, the more we risk a backlash and another swing of the pendulum into the world of the 40's and 50's... hiding everything for fear of oppression.

The perspective that one must "identify" or brand themselves I find absurd. While it is absolutely an individual stance that every human takes in how much of their lives to reveal to others, the current trend is to create a ridiculous level of stress to comply with the new "norm". So I'd like to know which comedic, bossy queen waved this wand and decreed that I must, after 68 successful years on the planet, no longer be surprised, dismayed, unapproving, or of a unique and individual opinion in any single thing, complying to this new and erroneous homogenizing decree.

So let's be fair. If you or I or anyone tells any person for whatever reason that they must not live their truth, then you or I or anyone are forcing someone to live a lie. Presenting facts without accusation and from your individual perspective is how anyone can learn... but you can absolutely learn from them in the same way. That is, unless in school and life it was only you teaching others how to think and live in your supreme superiority.

I will never sport a forehead tattoo with an added letter every few months declaring I treat all fairly. It's as if a hetero individual were to wear a neon flashing sign that kept people up nights "I fuck my wife in the ass while she reads Shakespeare. Equal rights for Shakespeare buttfuckers!!"

The school story of a father storming into the school admin office demanding his daughter who identifies as a cat be allowed to have a litter box under her desk at school... and SUCCEEDED. Puh-leeeeeeeeze, Agnes Ridiculous, if I had children in school (given I'm paying for it anyway and will never utilize these asylums of dementia), I'd insist my child identifies as a privileged, wealthy bully, and therefore can only be taught while sipping champagne in his Ferrari. It's his right to be an individual and live his truth.

Let's stop being such total hypocrites and practice what we preach. Then the world would truly be a beautiful place.

first of all we are all human and will disagree all the time

second of all I wish it was that way but it isnt. Hollywood wont allow a-list actors or any actor to come on out so no we dont live in the world of coming out. If that was that case then tons of a-list actors would come on out. Not in later years oh I am gay I am talking the teen young adult bracket here

 

[Hephaestion47]

Celebrity society has changed over the years. During the 1920's, it was seriously exaggerated the other direction. Have a look at the art from the era. Men with men, women, orgies that disregarded gender... roaring 20's indeed.

"Coming Out" is a new perspective, due to society's knee-jerk reaction to the absolutely extreme tolerance of that time. Like all history, the pendulum swung the other way. During the 1930's and 1940's Hollywood still had a distinct homosexual center that lasted to the present day. The only question was whether you needed an umbrella in that decade to go out into the society rain. So check the weather, and you decide... umbrella, boots and raincoat or naked and celebrative. If you choose the latter, people may celebrate your freedom or brand you insane.

I submit to you we have not moved that much forward in inner truth and honesty, rather shifted the table as to who must stay in the closet with their own truth. It's not an attractive characteristic, period. In fact, if bigots can't speak up and be honest about how they feel, we'll never know who they are and how to deal with them. The more we practice what they did, forcing attitudes, opinions and behaviors only in our direction, the more we risk a backlash and another swing of the pendulum into the world of the 40's and 50's... hiding everything for fear of oppression.

The perspective that one must "identify" or brand themselves I find absurd. While it is absolutely an individual stance that every human takes in how much of their lives to reveal to others, the current trend is to create a ridiculous level of stress to comply with the new "norm". So I'd like to know which comedic, bossy queen waved this wand and decreed that I must, after 68 successful years on the planet, no longer be surprised, dismayed, unapproving, or of a unique and individual opinion in any single thing, complying to this new and erroneous homogenizing decree.

So let's be fair. If you or I or anyone tells any person for whatever reason that they must not live their truth, then you or I or anyone are forcing someone to live a lie. Presenting facts without accusation and from your individual perspective is how anyone can learn... but you can absolutely learn from them in the same way. That is, unless in school and life it was only you teaching others how to think and live in your supreme superiority.

I will never sport a forehead tattoo with an added letter every few months declaring I treat all fairly. It's as if a hetero individual were to wear a neon flashing sign that kept people up nights "I fuck my wife in the ass while she reads Shakespeare. Equal rights for Shakespeare buttfuckers!!"

The school story of a father storming into the school admin office demanding his daughter who identifies as a cat be allowed to have a litter box under her desk at school... and SUCCEEDED. Puh-leeeeeeeeze, Agnes Ridiculous, if I had children in school (given I'm paying for it anyway and will never utilize these asylums of dementia), I'd insist my child identifies as a privileged, wealthy bully, and therefore can only be taught while sipping champagne in his Ferrari. It's his right to be an individual and live his truth.

Let's stop being such total hypocrites and practice what we preach. Then the world would truly be a beautiful place.

I struggled to find a single coherent thought anywhere in this word salad.

 

[8Cylinder]

I struggled to find a single coherent thought anywhere in this word salad.

That certainly makes one of you. In review it is in correctly structured English, written in understandable language. If your motive was insult, you couldn't have been more clear either. There always has to be the naysayer, and it's exactly to my point.

 

[qavak0]

I'd like to point out that you in no way engaged with the point that you got most of your fifth-hand apocryphal gossip from the discredited if classic works of Kenneth Anger.

 

[mikyang]

That certainly makes one of you. In review it is in correctly structured English, written in understandable language. If your motive was insult, you couldn't have been more clear either. There always has to be the naysayer, and it's exactly to my point.

your point that we disagree?

 

[8Cylinder]

I'd like to point out that you in no way engaged with the point that you got most of your fifth-hand apocryphal gossip from the discredited if classic works of Kenneth Anger.

Not at all. I never rely on single source information. At my age, I've had plenty of time to review a sea of information to reach a considered conclusion. History in general fascinates me. I live in Rome, and have done a lifetime of research on emperors and classic figures prominent in history. There's no secret that one of the most active homosexual emperors was Hadrian, for example, and acknowledged as one of the greatest.

When I lived in San Diego during the 70's at 18 years of age, I was introduced at Los Angeles parties to many who worked in the industry, attorneys, actors, agents, and the like. Hollywood parties I attended included many well known and unsuspected icons of TV and film. The conversations typically included many first person anecdotes of Hollywood trysts... Telula Bankhead and Marlene Dietrich for example.

My 30-year career was in legal investigations. When all indications corroborate an allegation or supposed fact, it's not too difficult to quickly affirm or negate the facts. Correct me if I've reached an incorrect conclusion here, but gay men (of which I'm one) delight in discrediting and negating far more than engaging and supporting.

 

[8Cylinder]

your point that we disagree?

No, and I'm not sure as to the "we" you're referring to, as the response was directed at Hephaestion47, the besieged lover of Alexander the Great. It's not disagreement that warranted a reply, it's the summary dismissal of the post, characterizing it as a waste of space.

It's sad that rather than engaging in the thread's topic, many sit perched on their dead tree observatory, waiting like vultures to descend on any carion they think they've found. That stated, I think in the future to avoid derailing otherwise valid threads, I'll just ignore the armchair critics who are more interested in critique than substance.

 

[mikyang]

Not at all. I never rely on single source information. At my age, I've had plenty of time to review a sea of information to reach a considered conclusion. History in general fascinates me. I live in Rome, and have done a lifetime of research on emperors and classic figures prominent in history. There's no secret that one of the most active homosexual emperors was Hadrian, for example, and acknowledged as one of the greatest.

When I lived in San Diego during the 70's at 18 years of age, I was introduced at Los Angeles parties to many who worked in the industry, attorneys, actors, agents, and the like. Hollywood parties I attended included many well known and unsuspected icons of TV and film. The conversations typically included many first person anecdotes of Hollywood trysts... Telula Bankhead and Marlene Dietrich for example.

My 30-year career was in legal investigations. When all indications corroborate an allegation or supposed fact, it's not too difficult to quickly affirm or negate the facts. Correct me if I've reached an incorrect conclusion here, but gay men (of which I'm one) delight in discrediting and negating far more than engaging and supporting.

becuase we have to live in the shadows remember

 

[qavak0]

Correct me if I've reached an incorrect conclusion here, but gay men (of which I'm one) delight in discrediting and negating far more than engaging and supporting.

Your scientific analysis is off there.