Actors forced to come out... what do we do about it?

✔ SUPPORT ✔
Patreon: / councilofgeeks
KZbin Membership: / @councilofgeeks
Paypal tip jar: PayPal.me/councilofgeeks
Ko-fi: ko-fi.com/verawylde
Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls...
✔ OTHER CHANNELS ✔
Break Room of Geeks / @breakroomofgeeks
Vera Wylde: / verawylde
✔ SHOP ✔
Merch: www.teepublic.com/user/counci...
My Book on Gender Fluidity: a.co/d/atfibBA (Amazon Associate link, commissions earned)
My Fantasy Novel: amzn.to/2SCxB8j (Amason Associate link, commissions earned)
✔ SOCIAL MEDIA ✔
Twitter: / councilofgeeks
Facebook: / councilofgeeks
TikTok: / verawylde1
Instagram: council.of....
Twitch: / councilofgeeks
✔ OTHER PROJECTS ✔
Council of Geeks Podcast (home of What the Frell & Jumpgate): councilofgeeks.libsyn.com/
✔ CONTACT ✔
E-mail: [e-mail]
Mail:
Council of Geeks
PO Box 4429
St. Johnsbury, VT 05819

[@ArtemisMoon90]

The thing i don't think people understand is that real people can't queerbait. Fictional characters can because they are constructed by a creator who knows their gender and sexuality. Real people don't owe you shit, not even celebrities.

[@tracydale154]

I am so uncomfortable with the concept of queer baiting being applied to a person who is basically just saying “You don’t get an all access pass to my private life” It feels very invasive- particularly when you’re talking about a young person who may well be figuring this all out for themselves. Yes, representation absolutely matters. Yes, if someone has stated they are Cis or Het, it would be far better to find someone from the queer community to play queer roles. But this kind of pushing someone to come out publicly? Not ok.

[@krose6451]

Exactly. Queer baiting is meant to be a term for calling out a show/movie/franchise. Not a person. For years, I've rebutted people saying, "Only gays should play gays" with "what your actually saying is only out people shou,d get to have these roles." When it comes to noncis gender identity portrayals I think its a bit more murky but when it comes to sexual orientation regardless of the characters orientation, the actor's is not our business. We cant say people shouldnt be forced out of the closet or that being out in private but closeted at work is okay and that its oaky to take time to try different labels and figure yourself out, then go making demands about this.

[@HeyLetsDoAThing]

@@krose6451 As an actor, I do think it's better that out gay people play gay roles, because that lived experience informs the portrayal, and no casting director can inherently tell the difference between someone who is closeted and someone who is being honest about being heterosexual. When given the choice to cast an openly gay person to play a gay person, or someone that claims to be straight, I'd always choose and want anyone else to choose the openly gay person.

[@krose6451]

@Hey! Let's Do A Thing! the issue is that plenty of people are out in their personal lives but aren't professionally, and thats okay. An example that sticks out to me is Queer As Folk. They even had an actor who's talked about his experience where he was out to friends and family but not fellow cast or the press since he didn't want to risk being type casst to only gay roles. If he or others like him was working a desk job people would say its his right to do that as he likes but as an actor we suddenly decry he isnt out "enough." What's more, given how the internet is, most people have learnt that for a persons mental health there should be a line between your real life and what you release to the world as strangers (and potential stalkers). What you share is just how there after so if your view of yourself changes your upsetting people for no longer being bi/pan/gay and get abuse. If you retire and leave the public eye its all still there for future employers to look up and see. People should have every right to keep private whaf they want private, including orientation.

[@HeyLetsDoAThing]

@@krose6451 Sure, but then don't act discriminated against if an openly gay person is cast to play a gay character and you aren't because you make a point of hiding your sexuality in order to avoid typecasting, and don't act like it's some crazy thing that people want to know if the actor portraying a character has the lived experience to do a better job playing that character than someone who lacks that lived experience. Gay people want to see themselves represented not just in the character onscreen, but in the honesty of the portrayal by an actor whose identity matches the character's, at least when it comes to real identities that can be cast for. A straight person may be able to convincingly play a gay stereotype but they don't have the lived experience of actually being gay so they have nothing real to pull from. They make it up and usually that isn't as good as an authentic performance from an actor who knows what it's like to be in that character's shoes. You don't go into an office job interview and hear "Okay, so the role we want you to perform is to be a convincing flirty homosexual." Acting is just a whole other type of ballgame.

[@arielsteinsaltz1956]

@@HeyLetsDoAThing If the story isn’t about being gay, I don’t think a gay person has to play them. Actors play attraction to people they aren’t attracted to all the time, a straight actor can do a gay romance (the reverse happens frequently).

[@anony-missy]

It’s extremely frustrating because Kit’s character in Heartstopper actually isn’t gay, he is also bisexual. The assumption the harassers made that because Kit was holding hands with a girl (a girl who apparently might be bisexual or queer herself!) he must be straight just exposes their massive heteronormative bias and biphobia. I’ve basically come to the opinion that while it is ideal to have queer actors in queer roles, practically speaking the best case scenario is to have queer people in some positions of authority when queer characters and themes are involved. Saying that the actor must be always queer might end up stifling creativity and causing us to lose out on great queer portrayals. It means that if a character initially intended to be straight and cast with a straight actor develops in a queer direction, that might get erased for fear of backlash. And as nice as it sounds to say that actors who don’t specify their sexuality should get a pass, I don’t think that will go too well in a practical way. People will assume an actor is straight (like Kit), or assume the other way that they are gay (like Ncuti) and then it will likely come down to whether someone “looks” or “acts” queer enough to get a pass. That’s to say nothing of actors that say things to the effect of “I’m more or less straight but I don’t like labels”. Do they count as straight? Queer? Unlabelled? I can imagine people arguing for each of those positions. And if “prefer not to say” starts to be equated with queer, I can see queer actors going to lying about being straight and cis to avoid essentially being outed. It also means questioning people who might be using their acting to explore their own gender and sexuality but still technically identify as cis or straight would get passed over for roles that might be really meaningful to them in a way they can’t quite articulate yet. I think having trans actors in trans roles is important (the most important of any identity to be cast authentically atm), especially with how hard the trans community is currently under attack. There are tons of talented trans actors that get overlooked every day and there should be structural work done to rectify that. But I also fear we’ll do more harm than good if we get too militant about only queer actors in queer roles. I think production teams should strive to cast queer characters authentically (which Heartstopper did make a point of doing), but if a few straight people still play queer roles I think it is ok. This is not to say casting is off the hook. But the pressure should be on the production team and the processes they use, not individual actors.

[@marocat4749]

Yeah, and if we want gay actors getting straight roles, straight actors have to be able to play gay roles. Hell i respect the hell of presumely straight actors leaning in that. Jzst be respectful and maybe have someone on set to call out phopars. And to be clear it should be an actor willing to lean into it and show they can unproblematic, but if, whatever.

[@HeyLetsDoAThing]

As an actor, I want gay actors and trans actors to get jobs playing roles that they identify with, instead of being overlooked and having straight, cis actors cast in their place instead, which is what usually happens.

[@anony-missy]

@@HeyLetsDoAThing I agree, hence why I said there should be some structural change at the casting level that makes it easier for queer actors to get themselves into consideration. For example, Heartstopper’s open casting call made a point of encouraging queer actors to apply, alongside saying allies were welcome. And what do you know, a good amount of the lead actors playing queer roles are queer themselves.

[@HeyLetsDoAThing]

@@anony-missy Yeah, almost like casting open queer people to play queer people is a good idea and better than casting actors who claim to be straight.

[@anony-missy]

@@HeyLetsDoAThing I agree that it’s a good idea. In fact, as I said, I think it is ideal. However, I also said that I think there are situations where insisting that every actor playing a queer character has to be queer and out can end up having negative effects, hence why I think there has to be some room for nuance. You evidently don’t agree, which is fine, we can have different perspectives. Have a lovely day.

[@ThetaSigma-vu1sk]

A lot of people who accused Kit of queerbaiting are just people who don't like him for no reason. Even now, some people still accuse him of queerbaiting and that he lied about being bisexual. They're actually very biphobic because they believe that he's straight only because he's never had a public relationship with a man, but yet he's never had a public relationship with a woman either. They even try to spread out that Kit is homophobic.

[@rikidementia1819]

For the record, straight celebrities should be able to reserve the right to keep their private lives private, too! Dolly Parton has managed to keep her husband out of the cameras for decades. She pulls a whole Hannah Montana routine by only going out in public with her husband without the wigs, makeup, and custom tailored outfits. Speculating on other people's personal lives, whether they're famour or not, is just weird. I've had other gay men look at my relationship, and just openly say what they assume are our favored sexual positions. (They're always wrong too.) Now I do think that if straight people have the freedom to talk about their relationships in public, then queer people should have that right, too. But that is not the same as openly discussing the private life of someone who wishes for that to remain private.

[@nagillim7915]

Too many people feel like they own the lives of celebrities because they're celebrities, but outing someone is not supportive or clever. As an lgbt person i actually don't come out to people as a rule. Not because i'm afraid or ashamed but because it's honestly none of their business who i do or don't have sex with. I would like society to get to a point where coming out is no longer a thing and people's sexual preferences aren't considered anyone else's business but their own and the people's they have sex with (conversely that also requires a society where if you come onto someone who isn't interested that they don't respond aggressively or violently and where you are equally courteous about their rejection).

[@NF30]

Yes, I totally agree with this! I just feel like it's simply not relevant information and doesn't matter at all in the vast majority of cases

[@samuelbarber6177]

Absolutely. Just because someone happens to be in the spotlight doesn’t mean they aren’t still a private individual. Kit Connor is famous because he’s an actor on a big Netflix show. Not for whatever his personal life is like. That’s quite frankly none of our business.

[@marocat4749]

The exception being overt hsrmful homophobic public figures, sorry they got that coming, i fully agree.

[@rikidementia1819]

In a long-term relationship, it is a little bit different. If straight people have the freedom to talk about their spouses and families without judgment, then queer people should have that freedom, too. I'm fairly open that I'm gay and married for that exact reason. Has it put me in awkward situations before? Sure. But I don't exactly pass for straight with most people anyway. If people can't tell your sexual orientation right away after speaking to you, that is a privilege in itself. It depends on the person and the identity within the LGBTQ community if withholding one's identity from the public is even possible.

[@NF30]

@@rikidementia1819 Oh yeah, that's a very good point! I guess since I've never been in a relationship before, it doesn't seem relevant right now, but for you it definitely would be, especially when other people are talking about their spouses too. Thanks for bringing that up!

[@ryno1509]

People don’t seem to understand that real people cannot queer bait only Fiction can queer bait

[@ryno1509]

“Queerbaiting is a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment in which creators hint at, but then do not depict, same-sex romance or other LGBTQ+ representation.The purpose is to attract ("bait") a queer or straight ally audience with the suggestion or possibility of relationships or characters that appeal to them.” Real people can’t Queerbait

[@ArcticWolfe84]

Celebrities aren't everyday people, though. They are, at least to some extent, products that sell themselves (and are sold by others) based on the image that they present to the public. As products, they absolutely can queerbait.

[@ryno1509]

@@ArcticWolfe84 they are people though and people cannot Queerbait it literally only applies to fiction

[@ArcticWolfe84]

@@ryno1509 Do you think that celebrities as we see them are the same people as they are in their everyday lives? Or can you recognise that, to varying degrees, they are presenting a certain version of themselves - or a fictionalised character - that is created for the purposes of marketing themselves as an actor/singer/person selling a product whose movies/music/product they want people to buy?

[@ryno1509]

@@ArcticWolfe84 it doesn’t matter how they present themselves, Queerbaiting doesn’t apply to people ever, celebrities or not

[@overlydramaticpanda]

Speaking as a bi/ace actor, while I agree with a lot in regards to your take on this issue, I honestly have to strongly disagree with the "only queer actors should play queer characters" stance. With regards to sexuality, at least. I know that the sentiment often comes from a good place and with good intentions but I will say that the sad fact is that this particular idea is, to put it bluntly, a *huge* and almost fundamental part of the problem of actors being outed or forced to out themselves. And there's a reason why you very rarely hear even LGBT+ actors speaking in favour of things like this, which I feel is something people desperately need to take into account. Because it's so horrendously easy to flip that statement on its head (and it's been done multiple times with multiple minorities) to say "queer actors should only play queer characters". Queer characters who are still being written at a much less expansive rate as het characters - even fewer if we're talking queer characters who are actually written well. For me, getting queer people into the writer's rooms is the more pressing issue here; more queer writers will mean more well-written queer characters. And since the industry is still very cis/het normative at its topmost levels, you can absolutely bet that "queer actors should only play queer characters" is the way the pendulum would swing. As actors, we're restricted in terms of what we can play by an insane number of factors already; sexuality isn't something people wear on their sleeves in the same way as something like race or gender identity - there are plenty of straight people who are (if you'll pardon the expression) camp as a row of tents, for example, just as there are plenty of queer people who defy every single one of the stereotypes associated with their sexual orientation. Another danger to all this is that it simply reinforces harmful stereotypes of queer people and puts pressure on queer people to be out in a way that makes cis-het people "comfortable" because they'll know the singing, well-dressed man doing jazz hands is "one of them queers", as it were, while those who don't conform to these stereotypes are pushed to the sidelines or judged for not being queer enough (see Kit Connor's bisexuality being called into question just because of a photo where he held hands with a girl). Most other queer actors I know hate the idea of only playing characters that specifically align with their sexual orientation when the entire point and appeal of acting is playing someone completely different than yourself and for queer actors, that can often come with an escape which isn't something to be taken lightly - stories with queer characters still tend to focus on the struggles of said queer characters; it can be incredibly draining living that day after day in your work (even if you know your fellow actor having to hurl slurs at you is as accepting an ally as they come in real life) as well as being forced to deal with it in your actual personal life. With regards to myself, I genuinely can't think of a single bi-ace trans character in any work of fiction, so I'd not find any work at all if I had to play characters that perfectly aligned with me. Bottom line, unless an actor is demonstrably willing to talk about themselves, their sexuality and even their gender identity is fundamentally no one else's damn business. As someone who hasn't even come out to my family with regards to my romantic/sexual orientation yet, the thought of ever going into an audition and being asked point-blank by the director/producer/casting director or whoever else may be on the panel "by the way, what's your sexuality, because this is a gay character so we've decided to cast a specifically gay person" is...kind of horrific for me. And, to be honest, if someone needed the job badly enough (which the vast majority of working actors do), there's not an awful lot just stopping them from flat-out lying either way, future backlash be damned because, again, sexual orientation isn't necessarily something that's immediately obvious just by looking at someone. In the days when actors had to be seen to be straight or else face complete social disgrace at best, LGBT+ actors would simply be forced to get "beards" - for one example, practically everyone in early-20th century Hollywood knew that Charles Laughton was gay and he never did much to hide it, but he married Elsa Lanchester and that was enough plausible deniability as far as the public was concerned. Put simply, I don't see how it wouldn't essentially create an inverse of the same problem where you have actors feeling forced into publicly presenting an identity that isn't theirs (again, one way or another) purely for the sake of being seen as employable on the most basic level.

[@marocat4749]

Queer actors really deserve that shot and its probably fair to keep quality control but i dont think gatekeeping per se does help. Also like damn ,i have seen luke mcfarlane on killjoys as a great strat guy eye candy and he is so damn good as that complicated himbo. Just gatekeeping might restrict more, through 100% find an actor being able to be respectful leaning into it.

[@Grounded_Gravity]

Not to mention that some queer people who haven't recognized it yet might be drawn to queer roles unconsciously which may help them come to the realization. So they might say they're straight at some point in their denial phase but later come out. I keep thinking of Becky Albertalli, who had said she was straight but was actually a late bloomer bi who was forced to come out due to harassment. Author situation, not actor, but similarities.

[@RandomCorvid]

If "Queer actors should only play Queer Characters" Neil Patrick Harris would be a lot less well known.

[@charlesmeg9823]

Replying to @obliviousred, I think of the Wynonna Earp actors who only after playing queer women realized they were queer themselves or Hank Green who took some flack for writing a bi character only to understand years later he was bi. I have also had friends who throughout their lives have found themselves moving around the sexual/gender spectrum which complicates the question as well.

[@marocat4749]

@@charlesmeg9823 Didnt know they were. I mean they are good actors ad its shown as rddespectful and thought out , so it wouldt matter , but wow, jeremys too :O

[@RubyDynamite]

As someone from the Supernatural fandom, I've seen this type of crap going on for *yeeeeears*. Sadly, Kit is not the first person who's been bullied or otherwise tricked into outing themselves by malicious press - Lee Pace, NPH, and Zachary Quinto, in particular, have been constantly pestered by the press until they were tricked (Pace), bullied (Quinto) or basically blackmailed into it (NPH). Sadly, this kind of crap has been going on for a very long time because people will always be garbage.

[@Stephen-Fox]

The recent one I specifically remember is someone, forget who, getting blackmailed into coming out (a paper gave them an ultimatum - either do an exclusive where you come out with us, or we out you), and then when they came out on social media in response to the ultimatum the paper got mad at them for 'ruining' their 'exclusive' and there was an _extremely_ whiny column or article about that instead.

[@deaf-tomcat]

hell, even Lil Nas X got bullied/baited into outing himself!!!!

[@fairynerdy]

​@@Stephen-Fox I remember that! I think it was Rebel Wilson. Another recent actor that I feel was forced to come out was Noah Schnapp from Stranger Things. I don't know if he experienced harassment, but he was definitely questioned a LOT about his character's sexuality and a lot of innuendo was made. I got the impression he felt he HAD to come out to get people to stop asking him about it.

[@Igivegdparent]

@@deaf-tomcat and now people are trying to bully shawn mendes and the actor from abbot elementary/everybody hates chris into coming out just because they feel they look or act gay

[@gozerthegozarian9500]

One aspect of the Kit Connor situationyou didn't mention (probably to avoid going on tangents & losing focus on the main topic) was biphobia and bi-erasure, even within the queer community itself: he was seen holding hands with a female partner and was automatically assumed to be straight because of that - on the basis of 1 photo of him taken with 1 partner. Quite apart from the fact that a lot of gay men have close relationships with female friends, and may even hold their hand in public. People were so eager to jump to conclusions that they overlooked not only an important aspect of gay culture - there's a whole nickname for the female friends of gay men, unflattering as that term is - but also a whole damn letter in the LGBTQIA+.

[@ThetaSigma-vu1sk]

And the fact that Kit has held hands with multiple male cast members and even jokingly says he's in love with Will Gao but these people never claimed he was gay for this. It just screams biphobia

[@Stephen-Fox]

While you're absolutely right about biphobia coming from within the queer community, I also wonder how many people were straight women, because while not as much of an issue - or as much of a common thing, at least publicly - as the fetishization of lesbians by straight men, there is absolutely an aspect of gay men being sexualized by straight women. (Which isn't me saying that straight women writing slash fiction is fetishization, that's usually caused by people who want to write romantic fanfiction and the only characters who aren't basically made out of cardboard are straight men. When you get a franchise with a more even distribution of fleshed out characters amount the genders, the shipping - and the resulting fanfiction - tends to be more heterosexual oriented, at least for non queer media)

[@gozerthegozarian9500]

@@Stephen-Fox Yes, that, too!

[@gozerthegozarian9500]

@@ThetaSigma-vu1sk Exactly!

[@FrumiousMing8]

It's biphobia and it's a culture fostered particularly on sites like twitter and tiktok where people overanalyze everything. Because everyone wants to have a gotcha moment and be in on the latest gossip but cloak themselves in faux morality. Like everyone dog-piling on "couch guy" because of a short clip and saying it's just women supporting women, gotta keep an eye out for your sisters! There's no room for nuance when every internet detective can tell you who is a narcissist based on body language and not like . . . anything based in actual psychology. You know what I'm saying?

[@crazycatskippers8227]

As a young bisexual guy myself I disagree with your opinion on straight people not playing queer roles. The main reason why I disagree is because I don't see only casting queer actors in queer roles as something that would simply allow queer actors to be equal, then allow us to go to a way of casting anyone for any role. I feel that if we were to have 30 years of large productions only casting queer actors in queer roles, once a large production casts a straight actor in a queer role, there would be an uproar because it's been a certain way for decades. I feel that instead of making all roles available to everyone, it would restrict casting more. I believe strongly that art should have as little restriction as possible and I feel that this would only add more. I'm not sure if that all makes sense, but thank you for reading anyway.

[@seto749]

I think it's largely a question of which side should disarm first.

[@gemmamoon5998]

I understand your perspective, but I do want to add on that MANY mainstream queer roles have been played by non-queer actors. Gyllenhaal and Ledger in Brokeback Mountain, Swank in Boys Don’t Cry, Redmayne in The Danish Girl, Jeff Tambor in Transparent, Blanchett and Mara in Carol, etc. Maybe there has been backlash from the queer community for the past 30 years, but I would say that mainstream backlash hasn’t occurred until the past 5-10 years. And the large majority of queer performers who were in straight , cis roles were only able to get those roles while in the closet. Examples are Matt Bomer (who has said that coming out likely hindered his ability to be a leading man), and Lee Pace (who has actually come out more than once and then went back in the closet when playing mainstream straight roles; he has since discussed his hesitancy and is definitely gay). This isn’t to say that queer folks don’t ever get straight roles (Kristen Stewart in Spencer, Jonathan Bailey in Bridgerton, and Sarah Paulson and Wentworth Miller in almost ALL of their roles). And it’s an open secret in Hollywood that lots of leading men and ladies are queer but can’t come out because it would make them less “believable” in straight roles. And I’ve never seen an openly trans person in a cis role that aligns with the actor’s gender identity (e.g., a trans woman in a cis female role). The only example I’ve seen is two trans actors playing cis in the historical drama Colette (2018), which is a great step in the right direction, but also the first and only time a mainstream production has done this! This isn’t to discredit your opinion at all, I just want you to consider the facts. I would agree with your opinion wholeheartedly if coming out really didn’t affect actors’ careers, but it still does. Yes, gay actors might play straight roles sometimes, but being public about their sexuality still undoubtedly affects the way they’re seen as actors. And this problem is especially egregious for trans actors, who rarely, if ever, play anything other than trans roles. And even then, there are still cis folks playing trans roles as well.

[@crazycatskippers8227]

​@@gemmamoon5998 I think I understand what you're saying. My main issue with only casting queer actors in queer roles is that it restricts casting options therefore limiting the choices of the creators. However, from reading your comment I think that maybe a way to balance casting more would be to instead of advocating for straight people to no longer play queer roles, we begin advocating more for queer actors to be cast in more diverse roles. So more straight and cis roles. I feel that this would push us closer to equality than limiting the casting pool for queer roles. Instead this may open up more options as we begin to deconstruct ideas like queer actors not being believable in straight roles. Thank you for reading.

[@ohleander02]

​@@gemmamoon5998Jamie Clayton played a role in which her character wasn't trans as far as we know. More than once I think. just wanted to mention.

[@alim.9801]

Ah, so your worry is that queer actors will essentially be typecast only into queer roles?

[@sadfaery]

What happened to Kit was awful. Feeling like he was forced to come out to the ENTIRE world at just 18 years old? The so-called "fans" who bullied him into that should be ashamed of themselves. Now on the subject of Heartstopper, I strongly recommend watching it. It is a beautiful show by and for queer and trans people. (And the irony is that the female co-star he was seen holding hands with is out as bisexual herself, and he's held hands with his male co-stars plenty of times too. Double standards and bi erasure at work here.)

[@jamesgrieves2669]

In terms of "nothing about us without us" I'd also say it depends on the media more broadly. If someone is the "token gay" on a show (not that that model should be followed) then it's more important to have representative casting than it is on a show like Heartstopper where there is a significant amount of queer talent both on and behind the screen, including (at least, I'm only thinking about headline stars) one trans actor in an appropriate role. Kit was not the only queer role, not by a long shot, so the burden is less to ensure every queer role is filled with queer talent.

[@MusicalIrishgrl]

I completely agree with you here. It depends on the media. A recent example of media that should've had someone at least behind the scenes is XO Kitty. I have no problems with the fact that a character turned out to Bi my problem was how they portrayed the Bi character with the stereotypes of the Bi people being indecisive, noncommittal and disrespectful of boundaries. Not all Bi/Pan people are like this and I for one am tired of seeing these tropes. They could have had the same plot beats and outcomes but done in a more respectful less tropey way. My straight bestie thought it was poorly done and without spoiling said she wanted to discuss it with me when I got to that arc I was so annoyed I stopped watching. I may eventually finish it but still I wish they had a Bi/Pan person read the script.

[@Allison_Hart]

@@MusicalIrishgrl it can be a tough balancing act in media. i understand why there would be a story about a person who is bisexual and doesn't realize it yet, because that is common due to compulsory heterosexuality. while a bisexual person needn't be portrayed as "confused," i can also understand why, with the restrictions and condemnation by society, a bisexual character's coming-of-age journey might not be linear. but that's society's fault for imposing comphet on them since birth. shows and other media need to portray it as a commentary on society, that erasing bisexuals can *create* confusion where there otherwise wouldn't be any. (edit to say i totally agree with you, just wanted to add my 2 cents)

[@amandaski]

"But how am I supposed to support this actor if I don't know if they'll smash me, specifically?" 🙄 Please stop asking people to perform their queerness for your comfort. Especially teenagers. It's weird, condescending, and dehumanizing.

[@AnnekeOosterink]

Plus, in the case of Kit Connor, he was still 17, legally a child and in my (adult) eyes he still very much is now, when he was harrassed. A literal child was asked to come. Why are people even thinking about the sexuality of a child!

[@notjamin]

it's also just incredibly stupid because the character is bisexual so whether he dates girls or not isn't even relevant these people were really going "you can't play a bisexual character, you were with a girl!"

[@annw7843]

I could really feel our age difference when you said it didn’t really occur to you that a “closeted “ person would take a queer role. That always seemed like an obvious issue to me. It does remind me of discussions on what it means to be closeted that I’ve had. I’ve spoken to many people who discuss where they are out, and only counted themselves as fully out after they posted their coming out on social media. People who view things this way often view making a specific coming out post as an inevitable eventuality in the process of coming out. I’ve always taken the view that not explicitly broadcasting everything isn’t the same as being in the closet. If you’re accepting your own self and you’re not changing your behavior to hide things, does it count as being in the closet if you don’t specifically make the announcement? Evolving social acceptance of queerness, and evolving privacy concerns due to social media are making for rapid shifts in what it means to “be out”. This also leads to stratified understandings (like your blind spot) in a queer community that has a vast array of different coming out experiences.

[@maymaecat5149]

This comment really hit me bc I haven't been "in the closet" for years now. I never am loud and screaming about my asexuality but it's not something I'm hiding. But some ppl would believe that I'm am based on how I go about things. I've always had the philosophy that it isn't anyone's business, I don't need to scream from the roof tops to be just as valid as those who do. Some ppl are just quietly living thier lives being who they are, having it come up and then moving along. It's not something that has to be a big event or even an event at all. And since all we get in media is constant major event coming out stories it's all ppl believe it is, when it's just not like that for some ppl. I was "out" the minute I accepted myself and felt fully comfortable in my skin being Ace, sure I have that" I am ace" in my social media bios but that's only really bc I wanna find more ace ppl like me, a signal that yeah I'm here too guys but nothing much else . I always feel conflicted with that thought process though bc that's what homophobic ppl like to say ,"no one cares y'all don't need to be out and telling and shoving it down our throats" and it feels like I'm trying to negate that we need ppl who are outspoken about it and that there are those who feel thier best like that

[@bellablue5285]

Honestly that's the glass closet... if that isn't something younger folks are aware of all the better, but it's a thing somewhat held over from dadt (possibly before, but my experience is the dadt time)

[@annw7843]

⁠@@bellablue5285 I had never heard the term glass closet before, and I did have to look it up. Which part are you saying is the glass closet?

[@maymaecat5149]

@@bellablue5285 I have heard of the "glass closet ", my friends and I joke that my closet was made of glass with the doors wide open when I was younger bc of how so blatantly not heterosexual and non-heteromantic I am as a person. Getting jealous and wanting to kiss my friend and wanting her to only look at and pay attention to me? But also not understanding why everyone was ranting and raving about sex? Yeah I was a mess 😭 But I think it's more an irony thing?,when we use it, like when you look back really thinking about how closeted you acted and seeing how blatantly not heterosexual you are. Like sweetheart you weren't hiding shit but that wasn't the point of how I was feeling, I hadn't really understood and accepted myself then. I can giggle about it now that I know what I was doing was so blatant, to me and for my actions,but when I was younger felt like was the most well kept secret. I was abit more unfamiliar dadt, but only bc I have never seen it be shortened like that and its been a minute since I've seen much of anyone mention it in particular.

[@ani_kiku]

It's not safe for everyone to come out. There may be reasons other than "I Haven't figured myself out yet" for not stating your sexuality clearly. Family, career and personal safety may play a big here (not limited to them only of cause) and they are all valid reasons. As queer audience I don't even think it's our business to judge that at all and it gets especially worse when we are not taking about counties that make it relatively easy to be queer. And even then it is absolutely not easy at all. FLORIDA anyone?? Thing is I agree that we should uplift queer stories BUT we should never judge anything that isn't being written by an out and proud queer person either. Out and proud people also don't own the queer experience for themselves. It's so much broader than that and closeted people have their own right to this too. These are also important stories to tell and no one should ever go and demand a statement of the authors sexuality to have a right to even write the story at all. I know I'm not really taking about acting here but your statement can be seen in a much broader way and authors of queer stories get treated the exact same way Kit Connor did. Please look up what happened to Isabel Fall if you don't know already. Cause in the end this gatekeeping of queer stories which can only be told by queer people only hurts the most vulnerable of us all and these are closeted queers whos stories also have worth and value and 100% deserve to be told too. TBH if having straight people in queer roles or straight people writing queer stories is the sacrifice we need to make than I'll gladly accept it in order to protect closeted queers. If you want to uplift queer stories though, that is 100% fine. Celebrate those queer roles that get played by queer actors, celebrate queer stories that are written by out and proud queer people! Talk about them, show your support. We can and we should 100% do that instead of forcing closeted queer people to come out to justify their existence on the table at all

[@Stephen_The_Waxing_Lyricist]

A phrase I have been using for years is "In the Venn diagram of my business and your nose, there is no overlap" This should be the default status to take when deciding to out someone: their sexuality isno one's business except those the person chooses to reveal to

[@Allison_Hart]

OMG i'm stealing that. too bad the place i wanna use it most is at work where i can't lol

[@Stephen_The_Waxing_Lyricist]

@@Allison_Hart I came up with it some years ago, but I've not had the opportunity to use it yet in real life. I should be happy about that, though!

[@alim.9801]

May I steal this?? I love it so much 😂

[@Stephen_The_Waxing_Lyricist]

@@alim.9801 go right ahead!

[@sarosenna5850]

So there were two sticking points for me here: the first when you said about Ncuti 'he might not even HAVE a sexuality - he could be asexual'. Granted, I am speaking from my own viewpoint as an ace and other aces may have different perspectives on this, but for a general statement: asexuality is still a sexuality. Just, like. As a messaging thing. Then there was the fact that you noted Kit Connors and Ncuti Gatwa have never on the public record stated they're straight. I think something you overlooked there is about older people coming out later in life. You can think you're straight for a very long time, but then it turns out... you're not. What then?

[@JamesLawner]

I find it very ironic and hypocritical when the people who criticise outing people end up being the ones to out other people, like WTF?! Also, artists like Taylor Swift, Harry Styles and Shawn Mendes have faced “criticism” for not being openly LGBTQ, and their fanbases would also constantly make jokes, memes and assumptions about them (even going as far to try and find “clues” that “prove” their sexuality 🙄). One thing that should be noted is that Stanley Tucci had been playing LGBT-adjacent characters in movies for years and nobody harassed him into coming out, in fact, it seems like some LGBT+ people appreciate him and respect his work. Also, when it comes to actors like Timothee Chalamet and Jake Gyllenhaal, they also played LGBT characters and never got public harassment over it (at least that I’m aware of. I’m sure there’s “critics” online who’ve said stuff).

[@AnnekeOosterink]

Yeah, it's along the lines of the weird anti trans "we can always tell" people who make videos 'exposing' cis celebrities as trans. They can never tell.

[@notjamin]

As a queer person myself, I honestly don't agree with your opinion on queer roles being played by queer actors. Trans roles yes, always, but when it comes to sexuality I don't think so. It's definitively a positive thing when a queer character is played by a queer actor and if the main difference between two people who are up for the role is that one of them is queer then sure, let that be the deciding factor. However, insisting on queer actors just pressures queer people who want to act in stories about queerness to come out publicly which is not something I think they should have to do. Additionally, restricting who can create queer stories may lead to fewer queer stories being told.

[@JamesLawner]

Exactly, I think what matters the most is performance and how the role/story is told. If it’s respectful, or even thoughtful, then it shouldn’t matter who wrote it or who performed it, but if it’s someone coming from that background, then that’s fine too.

[@thebeecubed]

I feel if the writers and directors are queer, I don't care if the actor is queer, but I do agree about trans actors should be the ones to play trans characters. I think once we start asking is this person gay enough to play this part, it gets to personal and invades their private lives. It is not our business.

[@JamesLawner]

I remember when Ruby Rose was cast as Batwoman and there was backlash saying that she wasn’t “gay enough” to play the role! 🙄 I could not believe such a thing could happen.

[@Stephen-Fox]

I think, for me, my approach is not to speculate on people's sexualities who aren't making a public thing about their sexuality. At which point it's not speculation. It's stating what the person is telling us about their sexuality as if it were true. Of course, with the way tabloids act, there's a weird fuzzy line that shouldn't exist between 'actor making it clear who they're in a relationship with' (a form of talking about their sexuality, though without attaching a label - A man in a relationship with a woman might be straight or might be bi, for example) and 'actor's sexuality only known because tabloids take photos of them without their consent' (with the 'actor agreeing to make it clear who they're in a relationship with because a tabloid is threatening to go public with candid photos' - One memorable example being a tabloid who made it clear to an actor that if they didn't agree to give them an exclusive where they came out they'd out them, with a deadline. To which the public figure responded by coming out without the tabloid before the deadline. To which either a writer of the tabloid - possibly the columnist who was threatening them - or editor of the tabloid proceeded to whine about the actor stealing their exclusive.) Semi-relatedly - Particularly to the age part - There's a prominent and respected British actor who has a very closed personal life's response to appearing on a newspaper's list of queer actors, and does consider that paper to have outed him - Seemingly he was out within his private circles, but took the 'nobody's business but my own' attitude to his public life. I don't think I'd ever seen speculation or reports of him with any partner, he wasn't pretending to be straight. He just... Had a very clean divide between his public and private life that until that point hadn't been crossed. (I don't think there was any malice on the part of the paper - Basically, a newspaper was compiling a list of influential gay actors and accidentally included one who was out in his private life but hadn't made any public statements either way. (And after doing a quick search to make sure he's issued a statement about not minding people knowing he's gay, that actor being Richard Wilson)

[@sig4311]

Kit is playing a bi kid getting to grips with him realizing he is bi, and yeah the show itself IS ABOUT the fact that some characters are forcing the character Kit IS PLAYING to come out as bi as an 18 year old teen ... Like those people misssed the fucking point of the show on top of harrasing him.

[@arubinojr5670]

If they categorically refuse to answer what their sexuality is multiple times, that carries a pretty good inference with a long history for anyone not born roughly 5 minutes ago, and so it's probably a good idea for everyone else to stuff their question back down their word-holes for a bit.

[@kaepeterman5021]

I just want to also add to your nuance because I was bringing up in conversations a few years ago: solely thinking of people as in the closet to themselves/others or out ignores the fact that a lot of people don’t have the information to even really be in the closet. Like this has changed somewhat with the internet, but I wasn’t allowed to watch the news growing up and one thing that happened as a result was me getting called homophobic for not knowing what the Pride flag was, nevermind that once I had the information needed I could work out I was bi, trans, and non-binary. While I don’t think most celebrities would have that level of ignorance in this day and age, with less well-understood/broadly represented identities like being non-monosexual, non-binary, or trans it really is easy to see cases where someone is exploring an aspect of their identity that they didn’t know they could before through a role and feels weird to gatekeep people on that front. These conversations were also happening in terms of autistic identity and representation and there’s at least two showrunners I know of who worked out that they’re autistic because they either accidently or intentionally wrote autistic characters (Dan Harmon with Community and the guy who did Please Like Me and Everything is Fine). Having a hard line about representation actually has the potentially to limit authentic representation by people who are simply trying to explore part of themselves through art and that feels like a potentially dangerous line to walk in terms of gatekeeping, especially with roles played by teenagers who are inevitably working themselves out. It also ignores that people in the community can screw up representation of parts of the community too if the people involved aren’t diverse (the number of gay showrunners and creatives who perpetuate negative bisexual stereotypes in their work continues to boggle my mind, GLAAD exists for them too). I think what would help would be broadening the definition of “including the community in representations of the community” to include things like consultants and sensitivity readers who are active members of the community and giving them more open credit when they are there even if the main people involved aren’t a part of the community or out as a part of the community would be really helpful in making both representation and the creative process behind it more inclusive. There’s obviously lines that shouldn’t be crossed, but also taking a hard stance without nuance in the way a lot of people do is harmful to everyone.

[@koivunen2489]

Forcibly outing or just generally poking into private lives and/or starting rumours has been my one criticism of the sentiment. But also, queerbaiting shouldn't be used against real people. It's a narrative issue, not a real-life problem. A flamboyant dressing style doesn't mean much, IMO. The only message there is: this person likes these types of clothes. I think it was Noel Fielding who had his sexuality questioned based on his style, to the point where he ended up saying that he's the most boringly straight guy you can meet. And I imagine a part of the style is to create a level of anonymity IRL. Because if you expect Fielding (or Ncuti Gatwa for that matter) to look a certain way, and you walk by someone who kind of looks like him but is wearing sweatpants and a hoodie, you'd probably file it under coincidence. I know I would.

[@QueenCloveroftheice]

I think there’s some wiggle-room with coming-of-age stories as far as having lgbtqia+ actors playing roles in their own community. Young people are often still figuring themselves out, so you can’t really put out an ad for “16-year-old gay male” when you take that into consideration.

[@programmeroftheeve]

I think a lot of this, (take with a grain of salt), has to do with the world still being seen as CisHet as default (which I think is wrong and we should think of people's gender/sexuality as blobs that will form eventuality).

[@krose6451]

Agreed. Luckily, it seems 6 the generation coming up now is a lot more in line with this thinking. They also seem to understand that the closet can be a place of safety with an open door for moving in and out and letting people in as they 6 I find much healthy than the older outdated binary thinking of in or out. In bad and full of self hate, uncertainty, and fear. Out good and rainbows and a sign of a person who knows themselves.

[@Leena79]

If I had been forced to name my sexuality as a teenager, I would have gotten it all wrong. I'm still a bit confused, going from what if I'm actually lesbian to nope, still bi, on the regular. Pretty sure I'm not straight, though. I agree with you on trans actors should get first dibs on trans roles, and it is usually a positive thing to see a queer actor of any kind playing a queer character. It's not a desl breaker for me, though, especially when it's younger characters (Heartstopper did an amazing job with the casting, you should watch it.) I think for me, in genersl, it's most important that at least someone in the production is queer, when the story is queer. If a story is written by a queer person, have them be involved with the casting. A queer director might be able to tell the story authentically even if the actors aren't queer. In an ideal situation, the queer characters should be played by queer actors, but I wouldn't want to restrict someone's creative freedom and vision completely.

[@seto749]

This is one case in which the Q word seems too general to work well. I would rather my story be written, produced, directed or acted by someone straight than by someone of commensurate talent from most of the other letter groups. Straight people of ability tend to do their research and won't have their knives into me.

[@yarnpenguin]

I try really hard to be a descriptivist rather than a prescriptivist when it comes to language. I'm able to let go of someone saying "literally" when they mean "metaphorically" or if someone says "I seen" rather than "I saw". But sometimes, we come up with terms to describe very specific things--literary/media analysis, human behaviour, etc--and it absolutely drives me around the bend when those terms get stretched beyond their boundaries to the point that I can't be sure what someone is talking about when they use one. Is someone trying to make someone else question their reality or are they just liar? Is there a contradiction in the established story or something that just isn't explained? Is the character an author self-insert or is she just someone the audience doesn't like for Reasons? Who's to say! "Queerbaiting" being taken outside of its original context is one of these bugbears for me. It was originally coined to describe situations with media--usually ongoing TV shows--where fans spot queer subtext between characters, and the creatives behind the show know that, and the production plays into it but *they never intend to go there*. It should *never* have been stretched outside of that to be applied to real people. And what happened to Kit Connor--being forced to out himself as he did--is a very, very good reason why.

[@voltijuice8576]

I've never understood why many seem to compulsively speculate about people this way. When I've asked, I've gotten, like "But they might be gay, isn't that interesting?" How is that more interesting than them having other relationships with people who I don't know? I am happy to learn about somebody's gender, orientation, race, etc but those are details about their life for them to fill in as needed, not for me to fill in for them.

[@Raven-Woods]

I would say that we don’t even know that previous actors who’ve played the Doctor aren’t Queer either! Since actors get so much more media (eta: and fan) attention than other members of media productions, like writers, directors, producers, etc, I personally feel that it’s more important for out Queer people to be in those other roles than it is to have an out Queer person actor playing Queer parts (though I do think it’s ideal to cast out Queer actors for Queer parts - I just don’t think it’s always feasible).

[@Weezing336]

What if a "straight" celeb is actually keeping their sexuality a secret, or doesn't really know what their sexuality is? Are we to ask Ryan Gosling to tell us every thought and sexual feeling or desire he has? The real solution, in my opinion, is to just get more roles for and writing positions for the LGBTQ + community. Just take chances and hire a more variety of people. Normalize without saying who can play or do what.

[@salyx]

He plays a bi character and he’s an utter delight every single second he’s on screen. He didn’t deserve to be bullied like that, it’s absolutely disgusting.

[@loftus4453]

It’s so depressing to live in the US now. And embarrassing honestly. Can’t believe people are so intolerant and extreme. Why can’t we treat each other with respect and dignity regardless of our differences? Differences are what make people interesting. It would be horribly dull if we were all alike. It’s all very depressing. Great video Vera.

[@lolitaguevara86]

Very well put Vera. What I realised after Kit was forced to come out is that we can’t expect every queer role to be inhabited by an out, queer actor when the industry is still so hostile to actors who are open about their identity. Particularly when it comes to queer men. There’s not a single famous male actor who has come out and not seen it negatively effect his career, hence why we have no gay or bisexual men fronting huge franchises (Quinto did with Star Trek but that was before he came out). There were also whispers suggesting that Kit might have been advised to keep quiet about his identity due to the kind of opportunities that he would have been able to access after Heartstopper. Interestingly enough the media seemed most invested in his career journey VS the other actors in the same cast who are out. I don’t think that’s a coincidence. He’s talented and good looking by Hollywood standards and had lots of female fans fawning over him so I can see why he might have been advised to keep quiet about his private life. I think this current place that we’re in is very odd…cause while homophobia is still super pervasive in the world and in entertainment a lot of people (particularly younger folks) seem to be pretending like it isn’t and that everyone who plays a queer role needs to be out? Until we live in a world where someone can come out and have that announcement have zero effect on their career we just aren’t there yet.

[@nightowl8477]

Exactly. Neil Patrick-Harris said he worries actors are gonna be asked their sexuality before audtioning, which could be dangerous and certainly uncomfortable.

[@JamesLawner]

I was gonna respond with by saying that Neil Patrick Harris and Matt Bomer have come out and not have their careers completely uprooted, but I don’t know if it’s right to say, because while they are still acting, they haven’t exactly been given huge roles or been part of huge franchises.

[@nightowl8477]

@JamesLawner - I like to think we're on our way. And currently experiencing a massive push-back. But yeah, I like to think in our lifetimes we can have something approximating equal opportunity, so these conversations don't have to happen. I don't think that's ridiculous.

[@lolitaguevara86]

@@JamesLawner yes exactly. We’ve reached a point where someone is still able to get jobs after coming out, but their options are more limited. Matt Bomer wrote an article about how his career hadn’t gone where it had been projected to go post coming out that was really interesting. A lot of people called him ungrateful for doing it but I think it was important in terms of making people understand that there are unfortunately still repercussions. Kate Winslet has also been very outspoken about the amount of gay male actors she knows who have been told by their agents to never come out cause it would destroy their careers.

[@tokublwhovian]

I know this all too well, being part of the BL fandom. I’ll give two examples: 1. Krist from SOTUS confirming he’s 100% straight, due to repeatedly getting asked if he’s gay. One day, he snapped and it erupted from both sides. 2. Mew from TharnType confirming he’s gay, due to a co-actor (from another series he starred in, What The Duck) accused him of harassing, it’s all settled now. It doesn’t matter if an actor is LGBTQ+ or straight, fans are never happy. I sometimes wonder, if fans of [insert actor] are really allies or pretending to be. So it’ll lead them to meeting their favourite. I wish fans, news, outside etc. could leave celebrities alone. They already have it tough as it is. I know some will say: “they shouldn’t have become famous, if they didn’t want this type of attention”. I say: They didn’t know what was going to happen. Why don’t you put yourself in their shoes? Is it fine to speculate if an actor is LGBTQ+ or not? I don’t think so. You wouldn’t do the same if it was a member of your own family, a friend or a random stranger on the street. Would you? The amount of arguments I’ve seen speculating, is beyond ridiculous. The problem is, most fans are young and have unfortunately been given access to social media and the internet at large. Also, fanservice doesn’t help. But, to the ones who are older: you should know not to say and do certain things, so why are you?

[@MusicalIrishgrl]

Hi fellow BL watcher. One small correction Mew is Bi. The way he was outed by his former BL partner was not okay. I am Bi/Pan and as a avid fan of BL I am constantly thinking about these issues because in most if not all of these countries it is not the safest for any of the actors to come out. I applaud the actors like Fluke, Cooheart and more recently Tong (Tankhun from KinnPorsche) for coming out but there are many other actors that prefer not to say. Funnily enough that is the standard even if they are straight because the ambiguity helps feed shipping culture. Kpop is the same way I am pretty sure Holland is not the only queer Idol but it's not safe for them to come out in Korea as evidenced by how Holland has been treated. The best we can get is Bi hearts on a post during pride month or gender neutral language in interviews and lyrics.

[@MusicalIrishgrl]

In regards to speculating on sexuality, I understand where you are coming from. It is wrong to assume anyone's sexuality and act like that assumption is fact. I do not think speculating is inherently wrong it's just when you think your speculations are facts when it is wrong. Part of why I don't want to condemn people who speculate is 1 people are inherently curious (as long as they don't cross the line already discussed curiosity isn't bad) and 2 queer people are searching for other people like them in the media and society as a whole. Speculations can make you feel less alone. One of the things that drew me into BL was how many characters are ambiguously Bisexual/Pansexual and some are confirmed Bi or Pan. It was/is awesome to see so many characters I could identify with especially with some of them being leads in romantic relationships. There are some shows like 2 Moons 2, My Secret Love, Why R U? and Love in the Air where almost all of the main characters are Bi/Pan whether stated in the show or not. The first BL I watched was Love By Chance and Ae says multiple times that he doesn't care about gender he just cares about the person and that was the first time I felt truly represented in media. I think where it pertains to real people instead of just characters it is important to be respectful. The actors regardless of their sexuality should be respectful of the queer community and the audience needs to be respectful of the actors' privacy. Krist is an example of an actor that wasn't very respectful and the audience was also not very respectful. I hope he has grown from that experience. I am currently watching his new BL Be My Favorite with the benefit of the doubt and hope that he has grown and at the end of the day Be My Favorite is a fun show that brings stories I haven't seen in BL before. With actors in general we've had some actors who are straight, borderline Homophobic and only doing BLs bc they are lucrative for their careers. I do have a problem with this as well bc that role could have gone to someone else in the community or is respectful of the community. And honestly those actors don't play the roles in a way that is very believable to me. Personally if you're not comfortable kissing someone of the same gender don't take the role of a character that is queer and will kiss someone of the same gender.

[@JaredGriffiths2000]

Kit Connor also played the younger version of Elton John in the movie Rocketman so that was another queer role he played.

[@superkid801]

Excellent video. no one should be forced to come out. As someone who doesn't have a label and is still figuring things out, I don't want anyone to force me to tell my orientation. I feel for Kit and don't want that happening to anyone else. Everyone should tell when they are ready and not by anyone else

[@linus1703]

It's difficult because even if they haven't confirmed the media can jump to conclusions. I'll use the example of Rebel Wilson who had never commented on her sexuality but because she had been in relationships with men she was assumed to be straight but then she was outed as being in a relationship with a woman, and the article that did that attacked her for intentionally trying to trick people. I think it's worth remembering that actors are people doing a job and I just don't feel it is good for the queer community where we think it's not only acceptable but important to ask someone about their sexuality when making hiring decisions.

[@kevin10001]

This sort of reminded me of when Neil Patrick Harris came out cause he didn’t really come out on his own free will there was going to be a story about him coming out that would have essentially outed him and he pretty much came out to not be outed by the story sorta of like the Ncuti Gatwa announcement happening the weekend of the television bafta award ceremony cause I still feel his announcement was meant to happen that night but it got announced earlier cause of people who have to put it on the teleprompter seeing the announcement and tipped off the press and they probably called to confirm the report so to get ahead of the press they quickly made the announcement

[@stephaniemantle5029]

This is a topic that I have so many feelings about and no real cohesive way to explain them. I'm pansexual, but I'm married to a member of the opposite sex so to the public I appear straight. And I'm not particularly comfortable having to justify my sexuality because I fell in love with and chose to marry someone who gives me the appearance of a hetro-normative relationship because really, it's no one's business. It's so complicated.

[@pious83]

Outing people is always wrong. Forcing people to do so is worse. This idea that actors need to be branded/stamped/categorised with an identifier. In order for people to accept them in roles, is kinda gross. No one in any walk of life has a right to know what happens in a strangers personal life. Old Hollywood, for example, was rife with "representation". They were simply not allowed to publicly out themselves. Unless they wanted a new profession. Which even continues today, around the world. Because we do not live in an accepting and tolerant world. We live in a world that is openly hostile and dangerous for LGBT to openly exist. Elton John's biopic Rocketman, for example banned in countries wherein gay content is not allowed. That is neither isolated nor just applicable to the movies themselves, but the performers too. Placing a target on their back is in no way constructive, helpful nor anyone's right.

[@samanthawilliams549]

Thank you for bringing up the thing about Ncuti Gatwa’s dress and assumptions about his sexuality. Harry Styles has been known to wear dresses/skirts/more femme associated clothes and to my knowledge there has never been the same level of assumption or open questioning of his sexuality. Why is it that cis white men can safely play with gender presentation without broad sweeping generalizations being made about their sexuality but black men who do so are immediately thought to be queer? I hadn’t thought out this at all and I’m so glad someone is giving a leveled, nuanced view on it.

[@anony-missy]

I definitely agree that speculating about/assuming Ncuti’s sexuality was jumped on suspiciously quickly, and it is likely that him being black played into that. But there has also been a metric ton of speculation about Harry Styles’ sexuality too. Harry gets called out for queerbaiting regularly and there’s an entire conspiracy theory stretching back to his One Direction days that he and his band mate Louis were/are secretly in love (Larry Stylinson is the ship name I believe). I do think Harry benefits from his (presumed) cis whiteness in how he is lauded and accepted for his gnc presentation in a way that many trans and cis poc who have and continue to present the same are not. But people absolutely do speculate about his sexuality because of it too.

[@jonhinson5701]

I am still not convinced Harry Styles is straight by any means but I don't need to know any actor's sexuality in order to appreciate them.

[@JamesLawner]

Kuncan Dastner made a video talking about Harry Styles and the “No-Label” label; it’s worth watching. Also, verilybiitchie made a video about LGBt representation in media, and that’s also worth watching.

[@samanthawilliams549]

@@JamesLawner Thanks for the recommendations! I’d love to go into a deep dive on this.

[@Set666Abominae]

I’m slowly coming to terms with my sexuality (or lack thereof it may seem), I think, I really don’t know, in my late 20s. Forcing someone under the age of 20 to give a definitive answer just… not good.

[@casualcraftman1599]

A few things that would stop these terrible things from happening: 1. We should stop being obsessive over celebrities personal life. We do not need know the details of someone’s life just because there famous. It’s disgusting how obsessive people are over Bella Ramsey personal life. 2. Actors are not the people they play. I hope Antony Star is nothing like Homelander. Antony Star doesn’t have to force a fellow cast member to come out as queer and do the other horrible things Homelander did to be good in the Homelander role. Method actors have no justifications to be an asshole. Bella Ramsey being non binary doesn’t mean they can’t have cis female roles. 3. Non LGBTQIA+ actor playing a LGBTQIA+ role does not automatically mean it's being anti LGBTQIA+. And claiming something is anti LGBTQIA+ with only assumptions and no solid evidence makes the discourse worse.

[@chrisbodley8958]

Loud and clear no harassment. 100% agree will do that going forward.

[@chrisbodley8958]

Only did it 10 years ago but currently no reason why.

[@chrisbodley8958]

Also separate being wrong from being a Tucker

[@maracaegrizzley8734]

Identity and attraction are so complicated, to be honest, that sometimes it takes a person most of their lifetime to understand things that were always there. We shouldn't really be judging people who could legitimately still be figuring things out for themselves.

[@archaeogremlin]

Iirc Jamie Clayton was forced to out herself as a stealth trans woman under similar circumstances after playing Nomi (a trans woman) on the netflix show Sense8 and she subsequently stopped getting cast in as many roles. I, too, want authentic queer representation in media (especially trans representation) but I don't want it at the cost of causing further harm to the queer community.

[@EmeralBookwise]

I've more or less been saying this for years. Even with actors that are an ostensibly "known" quantity, we never really know for sure, that's the nature of the closet. Maybe a closeted actor would never go anywhere near a queer role for fear of being inadvertently outed, but then again, maybe they would intentionally seek those roles out as a way to express and engage with their queerness in a way that retains plausible deniability. We just can ever know entirely what someone's personal motives in the matter might be. Sure, if an openly straight cis actor is going around bragging about playing a queer role in some obvious Oscar bait movie, maybe push back against that. To be clear, however, push back against the actions and attitudes, not the people themselves.

[@Brunoxsa]

Thank you for the video, Vera! Being queer is not a choice, however when to come out of the closet is a (very personal) choice. And any form of harassment over real people must be condemned, especially if the same persons are doing nothing considered reprehensible and just trying to keep their personal lives private. That said, at some level, it is possible to understand the main reason of some of the ones demanding an actor with undisclosed sexuality portraying a queer character to leave the role or to come out: they want authentic representation. After the Stonewall Protests, Pride Parades becoming common, and gay marriage being legalized, many queer people take for granted their rights. Some of them also legitimately believe that queerphobia does not exist anymore and it is in the past, what is a very dangerous notion! Queer people (especially trans people) are more likely to be targets of hate and violence! If we not push back against the ones advocating against the queer community (or a part of the group), they will try to remove our rights without a second thought! Other aspect of the same problem is the belief of queerbaiting and "shipping characters" existing in real life, with actors being treated as their characters. That needs to stop! Performative queerness could definitely be used as a publicity stunt by corporations and certain celebrities. However, it is also used to accuse queer people of pretending. Personally, I would be okay with a cis straight actor portraying a cis queer character IF, for the casting, queer actors would be at least prioritized, and, after that, there are still queer people involved in the production and creative sides of the work. However, a cis person portraying a trans character is unacceptable and it is not different from "blackface", "yellowface", "brownface", etc. As Vera mentioned, in a perfect world where everybody REALLY has equal rights, the opposite would be acceptable if people-of-color and trans people would not be treated as marginalized groups.

[@noelleggett5368]

Ncuti Gatwa is NOT Gallifreyan! It’s about time we forced the powers that be to cast real aliens in alien roles! (Like Tom Cruise or John Travolta)

[@sadfaery]

Lmao

[@leaalbrecht3838]

While queer people playing queer roles is great, this is exactly why I feel like it shouldn't be that rigid. I share your opinion on trans people playing trans people, that is definitely valid. One thing that imo is more important than every queer character being played by a queer person is that the story is being told by queer people. Are the director and maybe some of the writes queer? Are queer people given the opportunity to audition and get roles? Were queer experiences considered when constructing the story? Those factors make it a queer story and if in that instance not every queer person is played by a queer character it is still a queer story, which is more important than every actors sexuality

[@AMoniqueOcampo]

I really like your hair in this video! I feel like while I agree that trans actors should play trans characters, queer actors should be free to choose whatever kind of roles they want, straight or not. And that applies to queer actors who haven't come out yet. I feel like fans should stay out of the lives of famous people or just stick to reality TV if they want a parasocial relationship so badly.

[@SomniRespiratoryFlux]

I think the big thing with this kind of issue, for me, is that this sort of nuanceless criticism that happened with this instance, and probably a big part of the blind spot you had (this isn't meant as an insult, just an observation) is that it shows an internalization of the idea that heterosexual is the default, and to some extent that cisgender is the default. That's not to say everyone who has that blind spot consciously thinks that - it's a blind spot for a reason, a false assumption trained into everyone by society and easy to fall into without thinking. That said, I also don't want the default to be "if they don't say anything they must be queer in some way" either, because that's still an assumption. Like... The stuff about Ncuti being assumed queer because of his mannerisms really irks me. I'm a cis, pansexual guy, but I've only ever publicly been in heterosexual relationships and I don't really have any outstandingly non-straight mannerisms to my mind. About the most is that I'm not hypermasculine and that I sometimes paint my fingernails. But by and large, especially if my nails aren't showing or aren't painted at the moment, I'd be assumed to be heterosexual by default... but I'm not. I guess my point is that the "default" should be an admission of not knowing or needing to know, and until society at large catches up to that, I doubt we'll reach the point of just letting actors play whatever roles they're able to that would be the ideal.

[@jospehjack]

My favorite saying "Perfection is a road not a destination.". Every human being has blind spots to work on. It is important to at least know yours or be willing to except them when someone tells you them.

[@otakubullfrog1665]

When you mentioned how you felt that straight actors shouldn't play queer characters right now, you forgot to specify how long this embargo should last or who exactly should have the authority to end it. I've noticed that a lot of different types of activists often overlook that part when asking for temporary cooperation from society and I think the indefinite nature of these requests turns off people who otherwise might accommodate them and makes phasing them out messier and more divisive than necessary.

[@krose6451]

It also allows jerks to more easily argue things like "trans folk shouldn't play cis characters" or "gays can't play bisexuals" by using the same arguments almost verbatim with just a few word changes.

[@DrakeBarrow]

With all love to the various marginalized groups...you've hit the point on the head, OP. It doesn't end and it's not intended to end. There is no period where it will suddenly be OK for a hetero actor to play a queer character, though the reverse will never be considered a problem because of historical precedent even when said precedent is long since dust and bad dreams. It's a point which frustrates the hell out of me, because it's setting up problems for later down the road. If your end goal is to make a world where none of this matters, you DON'T get there by making EVERYTHING matter - all you do is make a new pecking order and shuffle the ranking.

[@arthurpprado]

What angers me further in this situation is that a few more recent pics came out where Kit is holding hands with Joe Locke who is the other lead in Heartstopper, and people are seemingly celebrating the event because "oh, now he is dating who he is supposed to", as if the entire fiasco that led him to come out never happened. People just don't learn

[@christineherrmann205]

I dunno, for me it's acting. I don't care if gay people play straight roles or vice versa - who cares. I don't have as firm an opinion on "let cis play a trans person and trans people play cis people" but I tend to lean that way because the ONE thing I'm most determined to uphold is actors being able to have private lives. So I was glad to see this video. It also isn't only actors; anyone in your life who doesn't come out and say "I'm gay, I'm poly, I'm trans, etc" JUST ACCEPT THEM AS A PERSON and mind your own damn business unless they tell you. My 0.02.

[@apteryxdrake9959]

I remember seeing the Kit stuff on twitter as it was happening and I couldn't understand how it was anyone's business. Dude was a teenager, he deserved his privacy. I think it borders on sexual harassment to think they're entitled to know the sexuality of a young person (of anyone really but especially a young person), just because he happens to be famous. As for the representation issue, I think it's a little more complicated. With trans folk, I think that it's pretty cut and dry that a trans actor should play a trans character, particularly if it's a story about transness. But with sexuality it's so much blurrier. I think if the stories are specifically about being gay or coming out or that sort of story a gay or bi character should be played by a similarly identifying actor, just because it's a more genuine performance and its one of OUR stories, we should be the ones to tell it. But it would depend on the narrative how important that rep is (I mean, beyond the fact that we really need to see more queer actors on screen, of course). I guess what I'm saying is I think that folks try and polarize these sorts of issues far too much and say it's all or nothing, wrong right, without any nuance, or any understanding of context. It's too complex an issue to have one answer for.

[@DrMike18]

Like I can understand wanting to see queer characters being cast by someone who is queer, who reflects the community that they’re supposed to represent. And I can stand behind pressuring casting agents, directors, producers to make that happen. But once an actor is cast, you gotta let it go, especially in the case of queer rep because 1. You aren’t owed every details of a person’s personal life and 2. You attacking the actor might force someone who isn’t ready to publicly come out to come out.

[@shannonchristie-wickham8453]

Thanks for an honest , thoughtful video. It is so important to revisit how we do things and how it effects others, even when our intentions are good. We all need to do this .

[@VonPatzy]

This was beautiful. I’m GenX and admit I don’t even know who this person is or the movie they were in - but so much YES to your take here. Sadly the internet is too big a creature not to constantly be doing all the things all the time - but I will also move forward with this in my mental fannypack. Very important take on the ever evolving landscape.

[@sadfaery]

So he's one of the stars of Heartstopper, but he ALSO played a young Elton John in Rocketman and he was the voice of Pantalaimon in His Dark Materials.

[@JaredGriffiths2000]

I did hear about this happening to Kit Connor. I'm sorry this happened to him.

[@cathunsworth7915]

Thank you so much for this video. It gave me a lot to ponder on. Two immediate responses that I haven’t quite decided about, but thought I’d share. Other views than mine are valid. First, as a bi cis woman, I had a moment of pause when you talked about leave the private people alone. Because I could see the inevitable next question and its implications. Let me explain. I’m with you where people have openly declared their identity (as in said “as a straight person, I did X research in preparing for this role”). But most people assume monosexuality in the absence of other information when someone is in a declared relationship. Particularly when that declared relationship is opposite-sex. Because of heteronormativity. So, is being married an open declaration of identity? No it isn’t. But the mainstream media assumes it is. And I feel a bit conflicted, because I loved what you said about letting private people be (tl;dr I heard it as private isn’t the same as closeted), but monosexual identities get privileged when society accepts marriage (other public declarations of relationship are available) as a declaration of identity. And I’m a bit twitchy about the bi/pan erasure of it all. Wow. That touched a nerve. Let’s see how my second point goes. On the private/closeted thing. I started wondering what I actually mean if I were to say “only gay should play gay”. For a number of reasons. Sorry if this goes on a bit. - historically, out actors struggled to get any parts, because their “lifestyles” were “controversial”, so they weren’t bankable - when queer parts started to be desirable (whether as Oscar bait or because they were fun), out actors had to compete for them while not having a level playing field at the straight parts - tv & film is a collaborative medium, so maybe authenticity can be achieved with a quorum of queers and the odd straight across the creative team, so long as the queer voices have sufficient industrial punch. One junior writer, or an actor at the beginning of their career, won’t have the heft to ensure damaging stereotypes or tropes don’t creep in and authenticity is onscreen. - here’s where I started to question my own view. Can a private individual deliver the heft called for in the last point? I would argue, not on their own. First, being out allows you to be a spokesperson in a way that, say, a “private” writer could make the same point and be discounted. But second (and I’m talking on the fly, please forgive me), someone private does not have access to the wider community that an out person has. I’m guessing doubly so if they have a public profile. And that access to the community is crucial for feeding in to the creative team. Because we’re a rainbow community. That means we support each other and experience much of the same shade. But we’re a host of different colours. I’m rambling. Sorry.

[@lilaboxx]

I think there's such a big difference between saying you wanna uplift and support openly queer actors / writers / artists in general and saying that you need to prove your queerness to be involved in any kind of queer media. There's obviously nuance to how telling some stories should be handled but if the execution is good I care less about the creators identity. Like there's a difference between playing a gay character and playing an offensively stereotypical gay character. (And I agree trans characters and actors are a bit different) Also, a German author wrote a sapphic vampire romance and I don't know if she herself is queer but the story is good and handled well so I don't actually care. If she had used questionable stereotypes the conversation would be different

[@mse90]

An often cited example of people being pressured to out themselves after previously publicly identifying as straight is Becky Albertalli, who wrote Simon vs. the Homo Sapiens Agenda, but - according to her own account - only realized later that she herself was bi, by the time she wrote the sequel book, Leah on the Offbeat. Which, for me, demonstrates that with queer identities, things can never be that clear cut. It is a bit of a different conversation when it comes to trans people, because more often than not, that's an identity that's, for better ot worse, going to be known once the spotline is on someone; but with identities relating to attraction, you can never really be sure, and I don't think it's worth the harm that it causes the people who might be affected. Imo, the best we can do is uplift people's work who are out, and already face potential barriers in their respective fields due to that, and not harass people on Twitter. I know it's not much, and I see the nuance in some of the conversations where artists lean into queer aesthetics without outwardly identifying with them, but, once again, I'm just not comfortable with the potential harm that these harassments campaigns might cause.

[@seto749]

Just because not everybody has a sure and secure attraction doesn't mean nobody has one.

[@mse90]

@@seto749 I was talking about the perception of queerness from the outside, not someone's own identity. Which is their business and they shouldn't have to share with the whole world. Just because someone said that they were straight at some point, doesn't mean that they still identify as such - or ever did for that matter. Publicly stating that you 'don't want to label yourself' can lead to just as much scrutiny or even more than just coming out, so some people will just say that they're straight to avoid that. THAT's what I meant by how you can never really know for sure what people's identity is when it comes to attraction. Not that there is no such thing as people having a well-defined label and attraction throughout their lives. I thought that was pretty obvious, but I guess I may not have been clear enough.

[@seto749]

@@mse90 That makes some sense. It would be vastly preferable if the "pressure" to come out took the form of closeted actors receiving appreciably less adulation than the out ones and I certainly don't support harassing anyone. I think it's easier for people with provable (within reasonable parameters) identities such as B or T to push fluidity and uncertainty.

[@bookworm209]

I'm aspec, if that matters, and I have no issues with an allo person playing someone with my sexuality, but I strongly agree with your points on the gender identity stuff. The reason being that sexuality has no... visual component, for lack of a better word. Actors often pretend to fall in love with people that they have no romantic or sexual interest in, so playing a sexuality that they don't have doesn't strike me as being any different. It's just a standard part of acting. If we only cast actors who were attracted to their romantic costars, then that would make things real awkward for actors who are in relationships not to speak of the nightmare that it would make for casting directors. The same cannot be said for gender expression. Baring unusual circumstances, you don't cast someone who identifies as a woman in a male role or vise versa. The same should go for non-cis roles and you can even see it in the role description. Female role = anyone who identifies as female. Trans female role = anyone who identifies as both trans and female. Non-binary role = anyone who identifies as non-binary. I think you put this really well in a previous video on non-trans actors playing trans roles when you said that a trans actor shouldn't be cast in an explicitly cis role, but most roles aren't explicitly cis. Hopefully I expressed that correctly. If any offense is taken, please know that it was not intended.

[@hollisbostick2872]

Firstly Vera, you become lovelier by the day. Haven't been by in a while, so glad to see the season treating you well. As to the point at hand, I'm just a regular person, but I recently experienced a somewhat similar forced out-ness when trying to remove the honorific before my name at the hospital (I was there for a control of my CPAP apparatus, nothing dire😉). As part of my social transition -- and prior to my intake appointment at the Gender Clinic (I live in The Netherlands) -- I took the opportunity to try and change my 'use name' (which is a recognized first name that you prefer to be called, whatever your legal first name might be) to my chosen name, and to have my AGAB honorific (ma'am or mister) removed if possible (though that's often less possible; the Dutch culture forces their concept of politeness very rigorously about this). It was actually no problem; the system seemed quite enlightened.... until the nurse 'demanded' a _reason_ for the removal of the honorific. "Because the patient *_asked_* you to?" I suggested. After all, it's my name, right? Am I not allowed to say? No, I am not. I had to provide a reason... Sex change... which was technically true, but given that I had not "technically" started that process yet, I was not too happy about being 'forced' to reveal it unnecessarily to settle the nosy and intrusive hospital system. Still salty about it, in fact. So I get, in a small way, how Kit Carlson might feel. And I also appreciate your admission of wrongdoing and personal growth through this experience with them. However, there is a point I feel was missed. *We are Kit Carlson's community, **_and we have rather seriously wronged Kit. We owe Kit an actual apology, and amends._* I don't know what that looks like, but by God, I won't stand for us violating and traumatizing one of our own and then just saying "Oops!" and leaving it there like it's OK that the victim is still bloody on the ground with nowhere to turn because _the ones to whom they would turn are the ones who beat them bloody._ It's just not right, it's not what 'community' means, and it's certainly not something that should be happening in Pride Month, of all times. On behalf of... me, I guess... Kit Carlson, I apologize for putting you in the position of having to reveal more personal information than you were comfortable with, for only my benefit and none of yours. I am sorry for violating your boundaries, I will respect you going forward, and I hope to regain your trust in the future. If there is any specific way that I/we/the community can begin that rebuilding process, please say; it was cruel and demanding to be so conditional, as if your value was valueless *unless* you "proved" it. I'm very sorry, Kit. Hope you feel better.

[@A_Hanım]

Representation is important but we also need to remember good shows like Will & Grace and how much of a good effect it left on people and TV culture. So, I believe as much as represantation is needed, nothing is wrong with a perfect portrayal of a gay character done by a straight actor, like in the example of Eric Mccormack's Will.

[@etherealtb6021]

Thank you for your perspective, as before listening to you, I'd have said, "But acting IS pretending to be someone not yourself, that's the whole point"! Although I do worry that the "the person playing the part must be the same as the part" will limit actors. I agree on the "this needs to be the case right now" idea, but I hope there's no silly pushback that only straight actors can play straight parts. 🙄

[@MoramothHauntz]

Anytime I see Stephanie Beatriz in an interview I know 2 things are going to be brought up. 1 her being bisexual and 2 the fact she doesn't sound like Detective Diaz. Its pretty lame

[@Rmlohner]

Whenever people try to argue that we don't know any trans actors that can be as great as cis ones, I point out that they're making the exact same argument that was used to keep black people out of Major League Baseball.

[@marocat4749]

There might be others i am mot aware,but abigale thorn?! And youtube acting is enough to show how great she is. The ollie one, ok that should just solify it.

[@FistOfFiori]

What happened to Kit was horrible, force to come out because of what boils down to idiot parasocial audiences. Famous people owe us nothing when it comes to their private life. And you can't queerbait as a real person. Also on this, while I think Hetero people (hello, I am one, maybe bias there) should still be able to play Gay/Bi/Pan roles, I do agree 'queer stories' as you put it should be played by the appropriate folk. Like, Russell T Davies' 'It's A Sin' utterly needed its gay characters to be played by gay guys. So while I think a straight man/woman can play a gay/bi person in places, when the story is LGBTQIA+ centric and is the main crux of the narrative, I agree us straights should (probably) be low on the pecking order of casting choices! Especially at the moment anyway, as you said it's quite important right now. Obviously trans/NB folk for trans/NB roles no matter the context.

[@Roitame]

I think the line you're trying to elucidate is that it's a problem when someone who can get any role they damn well please takes what few queer roles there are. I think one could even fairly say that, for invisible or ambiguous identities, it's not really an issue of the identity of who is taking the role at all. Rather, it's more a matter of the overall practical level of privilege being dealt with. ... I dunno, I can feel the idea in my head, but I'm not succeeding at all with wording it. I hope my sliver of thought can help someone else with their own words, anyway.

[@naofg]

16:25 "It should be those that have publicly stated their straightness and cis identity." I think this depends too, because we often say we're straight and cis before we realize we're not or before we accept ourself or even when we already know we're not, but we're just deep in the closet. So even if the person has stated they're cishet, I don't think that counts for much. Especially if the person stated that years ago, like... I don't think that says much.

[@Polycomical]

Really interesting video and a sensible take.

[@MovieMagic515]

On an unrelated note, have you seen Heartstopper? That show made me so happy.

[@marocat4749]

I shame that happened, without any fault of the show.

[@hakelliese7933]

It’s so sweet and wholesome

[@dickottel]

they always say they don't like shows about teenagers 😄😄

[@mayaross8634]

To my mind the context and intentions are also essential. The cast of Hearstopper is already mostly queer with a trans character who is potrayed by a trans actress and the other main character played by an openly gay man. The writer is also openly queer as is a fare part of the production team so the intention was hardly to limit oportunities for queer actors. Surely one should trust a queer writer of queer stories to make the best choises for their own media and community. They clearly know more about the specifics than we do as they have actually met kot connar, so who are we to question their choices of actors, and demand answers from a young man who has only recently finished highschool.

[@Swenglish]

This has been my point for a while... That while, yes, it's ideal for queer people to not be excluded from telling our own stories, it's also important not to accuse actors of not being queer, or demand that they demonstrate their queerness as some kind of qualifier. Where I'd draw the hard line is if somebody is openly anti-queer. A homophobe should not be allowed to play a gay character, even if they are in fact closeted and projecting their own insecurities, as a not-insignificant number of homophobes are. But when it comes to somebody simply *seeming* to be cisgender and heterosexual, or is assumed to be based on a lack of evidence to suggest otherwise, I don't think it's anyone's place to police their queer cred. In fact, playing a queer character could be a way for a person who is still figuring themself out to move forward *toward* coming out. I don't believe in forcing that process, because everyone's journey is different. I think there's a distinction between saying "here's how I would like things to be", in a general sense, and directly attacking somebody for not obviously matching that ideal. The latter is wrong, and I can't get behind it. If an apparently "straight" actor is playing a gay character, my policy is...let it go. I don't actually know they're straight, unless they've said so, and even then, that's not a guarantee, nor is it any of my business. And I can say that while still thinking the ideal situation would be for the role to go to a queer person. There's no contradiction between those two things.

[@beauregarden]

I do feel for Kit. I think in this age of social media we feel far too entitled to people's private lives. Especially public figures. Everyone should have the right to keep their private lives private if they want to. I think a lot of people find this difficult because we are so used to getting what we want out of the internet. I actually have a small personal experience with a similar situation 😅. So, this is also an issue within the writing community (especially childrens lit and YA). The #OwnVoices movement was also co-opted in order to pressure writers out of the closet or reveal personal details that they may not want to. During a university project I felt pressured into revealing personal details about my health and disability because of a 'concern' that my personal experience did not match up with the character I was writing. I made perfectly clear in my proposal that I was willing to do extensive research in many different fields in order to portray the character as accurately as possible. Apparently that wasn't enough to convince them I was qualified so I had to divulge my personal experience which made me incredibly uncomfortable.

[@RedButterfly331]

I hear the "none of your business" argument, and it is valid, but I also disagree that actors must be X to portray whatever. Yes, LGBT people should be involved in telling our own stories, but it should be where it matters -- the writer's room. The director's chair. The producer. These are the people that make the calls on how the character behaves and what the actor portrays; actors don't usually get to do whatever they want with a role. Straight actors can play gay characters. Gay actors can play straight characters. Anybody can play an ace or bi character because they *follow a script that tells them what to do* and they listen to a director that tells them how to act. An actor should be picked for their ability to act and how well they fit the character, not depending on their sexual orientation or gender identity. It is their JOB to be something they aren't, and if they're good at it, they'll portray that something well. On the trans front... maybe. If a trans actor can be found that fits the role - great. If not, the actor that is cast should be of the gender the character identifies with. Yes ideally it would go to a trans person, but that's not always feasible, and I don't think I would mind seeing a cis actress portray a trans woman IF that cis actress fits the character better (this goes the other way as well of course, if a trans actress fits a cis character best, the role should go to her). After all, a good character should be more than just their gender identity, don't you agree?

[@politereminder6284]

I wasn't sure of my sexual identity until I was deep DEEEP DEEEEP into my 20s. 🤦 Pushing this on a teen is wrong.

[@kirameki]

I think the biggest issue here is peoples assumptions a not out actor must be straight or gay and might not be part of the queer community in some other way, such as being bi, ace, genderfluid or nonbinary. And like you said here, that's not our business and they shouldn't be forced to come out. Instead of harrassing actors who aren't out one way or another, fans should be lifting up the ones who are to show thats more of what they want and maybe create a safer environment for the other actors to feel comfortable enough coming out.

[@connor_patrick]

the thing about heartstopper specifically too is it was kinda a more niche thing before the show came out. it was a webcomic then a book series and gained a large following but mostly by queer kids. it's not a movie that a straight actor would want to be in for that sweet oscar win so there's honestly not a whole lot of motivation i see for a young straight actor wanting that role anyway (besides getting paid obviously). and it also included so many queer actors besides kit connor so it was never just straight people telling this story. with all the extra info actual heartstopper fans knew about the show, harassing kit connor was even more absurd in context imo. even if he were to be straight, it's still a heavily queer lead show

[@patriciablopez]

For me, every actor can play EVERYTHING gay actors can play straight and viceversa, the only thing an actor can not mess with for me are: ethnicity, race, and transsexual characters those are a no no for me. But outing people like that because of the notion only gay can play gay is wrong, is typecasting the actor, they are more than their sexuality. Look at Richard madden, Matt bommer, Jonathan groff, luke evans, the actor from Bridgestone who played Antony, and he is gay but played an straight character so well that woman fell in love with them. Real representation is that everyone can play everything. Don’t put people in a box. But having said that, if is a queer story there’s have to be queer people in the making of that show or movie, writer, director or producer, so the story can be a true representation of the story they are telli

[@sigyn27]

I think the most important thing is to have queer writers writing/co-writing queer stories. As to the sexuality of the actors, I honestly don't care. I do agree about gender identity.

[@TimothyCollins]

Nobody ought to be forced to come out. Coming out is a good thing and I fully support it but it's something that a person ought to do on their terms, not on anyone elses. It's that simple. It's not my business nor anyone elses to know the sexual orientation or gender of an actor or any other person unless they choose to share it with me themselves.

[@Ziggi_onthe_RISE]

Love this take Vera! I really agree with most of your points here. I think I only deviate in the continuation of this thought that for me, I tend to only really take issue if there is an issue with the quality of representation because of identity. I know you haven’t seen Heartstopper, but as far as my opinion goes, I found it to be extremely good representation of queer identities across the board. I would have a problem in projects where a queer character were portrayed by a cis/straight actor/actress much more if they poorly portray the community in the process. For me, it is that extension of a person portraying a role who doesn’t do the work to empathize and understand the humanity they must bring to it, that exacerbates the real problem. This is how I feel on the topic of own voice representation in most media, because while I fully support queer artists being granted the opportunity to have their moment and portray authenticity, I think a job well done by an artist of any identity is okay by me, because someone who has done that intersectional work to break down barriers and tell a true and authentically impactful story is still providing art worth acknowledgment.

[@drunkdogwithagun468]

I’ve seen people hate on straight actors because they thought they were straight until they took in a role where the character was gay/lesbian. I’ve seen people hate on lgbt actors because they play a character that is straight. What we need, or at least what I would like to see as a gay asexual man, is more lgbt+ people in the writing room working in these stories and less “allies” that think they are writing a good queer character but just tack on all these harmful over used stereotypical things and calling a day because they DIDN’T DIE FIRST IN A FUCKING HORROR MOVIE! ….sorry I got a little worked up there… but when lgbt+ people are allowed to have a voice in writing lgbt+ characters will things get better. As far as sexuality goes let the straight actors play queer characters and let queer actors play straight characters. If they can bring a character to life and let the audience escape into whatever world the movie takes place in then let them do their thing. Also just in general we as a collective species should seriously stop trying to find out every thing about someone’s personal life and not worship the ground they walk on for being rich and saying something we might agree with. Yes that includes all celebrities. At the end of the day a actor is just a modern day jester that was paid to entertain the audience.

[@ganapatikamesh]

I think this video pairs well with Alexander Avila's video on queerbaiting (channel formerly called "Are They Gay") titled "Why Can't Celebrities Queerbait?". The video is an hour long, but it goes through and discusses what even is queerbaiting, why it's wrong, and also makes suggestions on how to tackle the issue with him coming to some similar conclusions as you do here in this video. I agree with the approach you've stated as a way to deal with the matter and definitely agree that the issue of lesser known actors whose identities aren't known playing queer roles is not where the focus should be. I think you are correct that the focus should be on the higher profile, more well established, cishet actors who take on queer roles because the studios want to use them over using the higher profile, more well established queer actors.

[@benw9949]

Side Note: I think sometimes, some of us may need help to know there can be people we can talk to, ask questions, be safe with, even try things out if we like each other. I am not sure how anyone could have gotten me out of my shell, growing up. When I edged aroundd the subject, I usually didn't feel I could talk to friends. I did get to talk a little with a friend or two, and I think I must have been more obvious than I thought when trying to figure out if one crush I liked would be OK with that. But on the whole, my teens and young adult life ws way too isolated and I was too conflicted and anxious about being gay and if I could open up with anyone. I always felt like I was being baited when a few times, guys in high school asked me if I was gay. (It never felt like those guys liked me as friends or more. It always felt like being baited, ,set up.) -- I agree that we should not force someone to come out or get outed. But I feel like sometimes, some of us need a safe space, a safe friend group, to begin coming out. (And this is such a complicated area for me that I know that barely scratches the surface of the issues with it.) But maybe it's worth a fideo about these things. Vera, Jessie, or others might want to tackle the subject.

[@emilyrln]

I couldn't agree more!

[@sworddragonsliege]

I would definitely prefer it if a person playing a queer role was at least some version of queer, and for trans or nonbinary situations I would definitely like them to be trans or nonbinary. For non gender identity related roles, I think a queer actor should definitely be encouraged, but I wouldn't be super made if a non-queer person was cast on rare occasions. And, this is a necessity, if a queer character is in a film queer people need to be behind the scenes too.

[@magicrainbowkitties1023]

Idk why it's so easy for people to forget that actors, singers, celebrities, all that type... are people. And the amount of people trying to force those who don't want a label to pick one is wild to me. Literally, at the end of the day, someone's status as a queer person is none of anyone's mf business and just bc someone doesn't want a label doesn't mean that 1, they aren't queer, and 2, they're 'afraid' or some shit. Just let people live, some of y'all are genuinely fucking creepy.

[@bex9708]

I was so sad for Kit, especially because at 18 I thought I was straight. People can't queerbait, only stories

[@okaykatieokay]

The 'all things being equal' is very important. A closeted queer actor will be cast in queer and straight roles, but there are so many actors who have said they've struggled to get roles after coming out. So it totally makes sense for a queer actor at the beginning of their career to remain closeted, just so they can feel secure in their work.

[@moonlight4665]

I think it's ridiculous how much onus is put on actors, especially those who are younger and/or less well-known. If you know anything about the film industry, you know that actors - unless they're huge superstars- have the LEAST say in creative decisions. The people that SHOULD have to answer for representation should be writers, directors, producers, and *especially* studio heads. They have the most power, don't let them hide just because actors are more public-facing.

[@Caterfree10]

See, I’m coming from this as someone who’s been into slash and BL (Boys’ Love) fandom spaces for over 20 years at this point. We see a TON of harassment toward women who make mlm content bc of the old fujoshi stereotype of the homophobe who likes yaoi but hates actual gay people (which, for the record, while I’m sure they still exist, have not been common since the late 00s/early 10s ime). However, this hatred fails to take into account that a HUGE chunk of the fandom is LGBTQ themselves, even if they may not start as such (see: my thinking I was a cis straight girl back then but oops I’m actually bi and nonbinary lol). But the forced outings often don’t even help, whether it’s trans men saying they figured out their identities via slash/BL or even lesbians saying “I like BL bc I like Qu33r stuff in my media sod off.” So I generally have a looser grip on my guidelines for what actors are chosen. So long as the people in charge like Directors, Casting coordinators, etc, then I’m not going to fuss too much about if an actor’s sexuality matches if they’ve never made a public statement about it. Though I’m also like you in that trans actors really do need to be in trans roles, but that also kind of ties into me smacking my fave characters with the “you are now gay/bi/pan/ace/etc” sticks all the time lmao. I don’t do that as often with the “you are now trans” stick tho I definitely have those often enough haha.