  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Merv Griffin’s Bodyguard of LiesPosted on Aug 27, 2007
By Larry Gross When Hollywood mogul Merv Griffin died on Aug. 12, queer-savvy media watchers wondered whether notices of his passing would maintain his preference for passing as straight. In recent years, celebrity obituaries have continued the long tradition of burying the departed closet cases in journalistically closed coffins, taking the not-so-secret truth with them to the grave. Singer Luther Vandross, writer Susan Sontag and film director Ismail Merchant had all been accorded the privilege of “inning” by the press, however open a secret their homosexuality had been while they were alive. Nil nisi bonum appears to be the rule for editors, and noting that a deceased famous person was gay certainly seems to count as speaking evil. In Griffin’s case, though, I was somewhat pleasantly surprised, as The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post all noted in their obituaries that Griffin had been the target in the early 1990s of unsuccessful palimony and sexual harassment suits, both brought by men who claimed that he had done them wrong, though in different ways, and both dismissed in court. Still, these lawsuits brought out into the open, if briefly, what had long been known in Hollywood: namely, that the divorced father of one, and highly visible public escort of Eva Gabor, was also gay. In the years since his legal outing, Griffin was sometimes questioned about his sexuality and always deflected the question with a joke: “You’re asking an 80-year-old man about his sexuality right now! Get a life!” In 2005 he told The New York Times with a sly grin: “I tell everybody that I’m a quatre-sexual: I will do anything with anybody for a quarter.” The Associated Press, however, played the game the old way, limiting its obituary to Griffin’s early marriage:
Merv Griffin’s Beverly Hills funeral was a major Hollywood event, headlined by Nancy Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger and co-starring Larry King, Ellen Degeneres and a host of TV old-timers such as Dick Van Dyke, Jack Klugman and Steve Lawrence. For some, the event was reminiscent of the funeral of another famous tycoon, an occasion that played a key role in launching the controversial journalistic-political tactic that came to be known as outing. The New York gay magazine Outweek introduced the practice of outing closeted public figures, mostly politicians and show business celebrities who were unwilling to enlist in the cause of fighting AIDS. When prominent publisher Malcolm Forbes died in February 1990, the exposure of his homosexual side was not long in coming. The March 18, 1990, cover of OutWeek showed a photo of Malcolm Forbes on his motorcycle, with the bold headline: “The Secret Gay Life of Malcolm Forbes.” The article, by Michelangelo Signorile, begins with Forbes’ funeral, noting the presence among the mourners of many prominent homophobes—Richard Nixon, William F. Buckley, Al Neuharth—and asks whether they knew “that they were coming to pay homage to someone who embodied what they ultimately detested?” Signorile concluded his article with a defense of outing Forbes. First, he noted that, “All too often history is distorted,” and the fact that one of the most influential men in America was gay should be recorded. Second, “it sends a clear message to the public at large that we are everywhere.” The third reason Signorile gave was that this story illuminated a choice made by many gay people. In researching the story Signorile tried to interview a gay man who had been close to Forbes and his family, someone who could have shed light on “the real inner workings of Forbes’ mind.”
The Outweek story set off a firestorm of controversy about outing, with most condemning the tactic. The L.A. Times, which also editorialized against outing, named only dead people: Forbes, Rock Hudson, Liberace, Roy Cohn, Terry Dolan, Perry Ellis and Oliver Sipple; Newsweek limited itself to Forbes (reproducing the OutWeek cover photo and headline) and Liz Smith, a “favorite target” of the outers who is quoted as saying, “I may be a gossip columnist, but I do respect the right of people not to tell me ‘everything,’ and I reserve the same right for myself.” The New York Times would refer only to “a famous businessman who had recently died.” Times spokesman William Adler took a hard line, saying that the paper would not print “hearsay” even if the subject is no longer living: “The thinking at the Times is that in most cases an individual’s private sex life should not be the subject of coverage by the newspaper unless the person wishes it to be so,” Adler said. “That perspective extends through their lifetime and even after their death.”
1
2
3
NEXT PAGE >>>
SHARE THIS TRUTHDIG ARTICLE:
|
|
Confronting the Terrorist Within
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By james evonecht, September 3, 2007 at 6:46 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Skruff,
Report thisI was definitely referring to the period of time before the sun grows past the orbit of Mercury and turns the inner planets to cinders, I think that gives us a long time coming and going. And in that time frame there is already a very long list of humans who have had a profound and positive impact on generations of all living things that follow them.
Merv Griffin was rewarded in life like he was at the top of that list. He isn’t on the list and I doubt he knew one existed. He was a pig!
Beg your pardon true swine of the barnyard variety, your quite handsome and valuable in your own right.
By ProfessorVP, September 2, 2007 at 10:58 am #
That reminds me, Rae, of a joke I heard on the Merv Griffin Show, as told by the comic actor Joe Flynn
(a Griffin regular, he was on McHale’s Navy).
“A woman goes to the doctor, and she’s, oh, five-feet-two and weighs three hundred fifty pounds. She says, ‘Doctor, I don’t know if I’m coming or going.’”
“And so the doctor asks the woman to remove all her clothing, and she does. Then he takes a pencil and tosses it across the room. ‘I’d like you to get down on all fours and crawl across the floor and pick up the pencil with your teeth,’ the doctor says. And the woman does it. ‘Thank you, now turn around and crawl back to me.’ And the woman does it. Then the doctor concludes, ‘I don’t know if you’re coming or going either.’”
Report thisBy RAE, September 2, 2007 at 9:37 am #
Bukko asks “...And just how did you acquire that knowledge??? “
First hand, Bukko… then the other hand. I was young and the surfie was so beautiful… what can I say?
Re “I feel like the meat in a sandwich...”
Report thisThat’s what I’ve always called it but it’s always a position I’ve tried, at all costs, to avoid. Top or bottom is fine, but that “in-the-middle” position is far too confusing for me… I don’t know whether I’m coming or going half the time.
By Bukko in Australia, September 2, 2007 at 1:42 am #
I am honoured to have my comment appear between those of the distinguished Dr. Knowitall and ProfessorVP. Why, I feel like the meat in a sandwich!
(I think there’s a name for when that happens in a sexual situation, but it slips my mind...)
Report thisBy ProfessorVP, September 1, 2007 at 8:59 pm #
This is getting ‘way off the topic of Merv Griffin, but it is not uncommon also in Latin culture to, for the sake of pride, assign the word gay ("maricon") to the one who gives oral sex, and takes it up… uh, takes it up with the manager. And the other guy can still convince himself he is straight. This I know for a fact. I have heard that many black men also often think similarly- since they have wives and children at home, how can they be gay? The result? Of course, it is HIV infection.
Report thisBy Bukko in Australia, September 1, 2007 at 7:52 pm #
So RAE, you taught me something that I never knew about gay life in Oz. (Never thought to ask any of my gay co-workers, not that the topic would even come up...) And just how did you acquire that knowledge???
Report thisBy Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, September 1, 2007 at 8:53 am #
Ed, you can be BI, too. So you can be either straight, gay or bi-. And I suppose you can be asexual, as well. I know some people I think have no interest whatsoever in anything sexual in nature. They’d be neither straight, gay or bi-, but a-. Then you’ve probably got your pan-sexual people or those who have sex with anything and everything, including themselves. Actually, the more I think about it, there are any number of sexual classes or genre under which people might fall. Then, you have to allow for the possiblity of people switching persuasions from time to time so that they’d be erstwhile one thing or another then a neo-something else. The whole thing can get kind of complicated if you think about it long enough. Merv did give something to the world that it sorely needed and needs now more than ever and that’s entertainment. Have you ever stopped to think about how big entertainment is in this country? It would be gargantuan even if Wheel of Fortune were the only source. I heard that people of all sexual persuasions have won hundreds of millions on that show in its 25+ years. Well, I could go on but I need to get back into my therapy session. I’m considering turning gay.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, September 1, 2007 at 7:11 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s amazing: Someone like 1drees can post an inrelevant post calling for a boycott of Israel, but MY challenge to that tangent was censored by this site’s ownership.
Will they post this? Or would they, like the British tabloids, exploit the death of Merv Griffin, a man who brought SO many people pleasure who watched his shows? Jeopardy: Which makes you feel stupid because the contestants are SO smart. Wheel of Fortune: Which makes you feel stupid because YOU are watching it!
Report thisBy ProfessorVP, August 31, 2007 at 8:27 pm #
Your 100% wrong, Boggs. Merv Griffin, if you are old enough to have watched him, was a public figure who came into millions of homes on television. He didn’t have to run for public office to be someone people wanted to know about.
You struck out again re: Larry Craig. If this anti-gay, holier-than-thou legislator had been caught in the presidential suite of the swankiest hotel in bed with another man, people would want to know about it, bigtime.
Report thisBy boggs, August 31, 2007 at 5:25 pm #
Some of you are insisting that this is a necessary conversation, but it’s really not.
Report thisMerv never ran for a public office and if he had I don’t think I would care a twit.
This is nothing more then GOSSIP for the sake of gossip.
Let it go!
No one would have cared what L. Craig did if he had not tried to do it in a public place. How disgusting.
By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, August 31, 2007 at 2:14 pm #
Skruff, in answer to your question: Wheel of Fortune!
Report thisBy RAE, August 30, 2007 at 7:57 pm #
Bukko writes “Australia is not a stick-up-its-arse kinda place...”
Careful, mate. I lived three wonderful years down under and learned, to my astonishment, that a guy is consider a “poofta” ONLY if (a) he’s giving the BJ or (b) “receiving” from behind, if you know what I mean. The guy getting the BJ or “pitching” doesn’t consider himself gay and doesn’t seem to be considered “gay” by others either!
Oh ya… the BIG no-no is talking about “it” the next day. “Things happen” when “mates” are pissy drunk, the night is hot, and the opportunity arises. Enjoy it. BUT SHUT UP ABOUT IT.
I found this rationalization of the male/male sex roles fascinating and funny as hell.
I agree that during my time in Oz I found attitudes about sex and sexual practices much more mature than in the USA. Overt faggy homos who insisted on flaunting their bizarre behaviors in inappropriate places at inappropriate times usually ran into trouble.
Those who “practised” their sexuality with discretion usually never ran into problems. Although I do remember one occasion in a park loo in Sydney… it was damnable entrapment… imagine using a 20-year-old, built-like-a-brick-shithouse, drop-dead good looking, hunky undercover cop to entrap a fella just looking for a good time!
Report thisBy ProfessorVP, August 30, 2007 at 5:19 pm #
You are absolutely spot on, Bukko, America is at the same time prudish and prurient, which explains the schizophrenia of Fox. FoxNews is prudish, Fox Network is salacious, with its laugh-tracked sex and potty humor. Was it Ben Franklin who said, “Humans are the only animals that blush… or need to.”
That said, Merv Griffin did not keep his sexuality private. He often spoke of his wife Julann and his son Tony, which could be perceived as evidence of straightness, and long after his divorce, spoke of Eva Gabor as his live-in girlfriend. Therefore, you cannot say that it was the Nosybodies Collective that forced the issue of sexual orientation on Merv Griffin. Merv Griffin took the initiative to appear straight. Why? For one thing, in the entertainment business, it is more profitable. But when one already has a billion dollars, I ask- rhetorically- how much more profit does one need?
Report thisBy Bukko in Australia, August 30, 2007 at 4:01 pm #
I never watched Merv’s show, so maybe I missed the episodes where he ranted about how bad homosexuality is while being on the down-low himself. What’s that you say? He DIDN’T make a career of hypocritically criticising publicly that which he did secretly? Then I agree with everyone here who said “Who cares?”
I’m all for outing hypocrites. It’s called “honesty.” I’d feel the same way about someone who was always speechifying about how great it is to be a vegetarian, then went home three nights a week to fry up a pan full of scrambled calf brains.
But if someone likes gay sex and doesn’t make a big deal of how much they hate it, I say let ‘em stay in the closet. (Like a certain U.S. Senator and a state governor from the old Confederacy.) These people are working in government, not acting in sex films. So it’s none of my business how they swing it in private. Unless they’re being grossly hypocritical, of course.
One thing I’ve learned from living outside the United States is what a prurient society America is. The culture is both PRUDISH and PERVERTED. On the whole, Americans (not enlightened TruthDiggers, of course) are shocked, shocked, I tell you! about sex. But it’s always on their minds. It’s like whenever they see someone, they’re thinking “How does that person DO IT?”
Australia is not a stick-up-its-arse kinda place—America was settled by Puritans; Oz by prisoners—but there’s nowhere near the emphasis on private sex lives here as there is in the (original) States. People here don’t spend time talking about their mating habits, even though they call everybody “mate.”
For instance, my boss is gone on maternity leave, but until she started showing, I had no idea whether she was straight or gay, married, partnered or just knocked up. And I didn’t care. Know why? Because she was my BOSS, not someone I would consider sleeping with. Americans should adopt the same attitude. If you don’t want to rub uglies with a person, then who cares how they do it?
Unless it’s Britney, of course. Now I gotta switch sites and find out more!
Report thisBy ProfessorVP, August 30, 2007 at 2:48 pm #
Rae, can you imagine this conversation taking place, while watching the old Merv Griffin Show (which I used to enjoy): “Say, Merv Griffin sure is funny tonight. He’s divorced, isn’t he?” “That’s none of our beeswax.” “Well, he’s still somewhat attractive. Is he dating?” “Just enjoy the show, dear, don’t think about who Merv’s dating.” “I recall he was seeing Eva Gabor.” “That’s their business, just concentrate on the show.” “I heard he might be gay.” “That does it, turn the TV off.”
Look, folks, you want total privacy- work as an accountant or whatever in your own office or cubicle, or go into the dry cleaning business. When you go into millions of people’s homes, or expect people to shell out $9 to see your movie, or you’re running for office, it is childish to say, “Just let me do my job, everything else is private.” Because an entertainer, a politician, or any public figure is sold as a whole package. That’s the way it is, and I don’t believe that’s fundamentally wrong.
Report thisBy Skruff, August 30, 2007 at 11:32 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
97677 by James Evonecht on 8/30 at 8:53 am
“Name me one thing that this man left behind that has true worth and will be remembered with any value for posterity.”
OK, I turn the challenge around. what has ANY human being done that will be of benefit to a surviving planet when the human race is gone…
Report thisBy James Evonecht, August 30, 2007 at 8:53 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Anyone who thinks they are worth as much money as Merv Griffin was worth, has no rights in my world. Do what you will with their lives or reputations, dead or alive. They are the true predators on this planet and until we rid the world of these ego driven fools and their parishioners nothing will work, no economy, political system or religion has a chance against the dollar. Merv Griffin was a pig as is Nancy Reagan! Although nonconsequential, if his sexuality does him and his cronies harm, then I say have at it. He created nothing but drivel, healed nothing, all for hundreds of millions of dollars, more than thousands of us will make in a lifetime. Name me one thing that this man left behind that has true worth and will be remembered with any value for posterity.
Report thisBy RAE, August 30, 2007 at 7:00 am #
Well, “Professor,” you could well be correct when you claim “A lot of people care.” But this doesn’t mean it is any of “a lot” people’s business.
My sexual orientation is no more the business of others than is my hair color or height… with the possible exception of those with whom I wish to interact sexually. Heterosexism* is just as odious and unjust and unfair as most other “isms.”
It is nonsense to accept that what a majority of people “think” “feel” “do” is the standard to which everyone should aspire. Humans are not Borgs. “The majority” have OFTEN been 100% DEAD WRONG about “a lot” of things. The task of point that out unfortunately most often falls to the “minorities.”
*BTW, the definition of a “heterosexist” is one who thinks EVERYONE IS STRAIGHT… OR SHOULD BE.
Report thisBy Skruff, August 30, 2007 at 5:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
97636 by ProfessorVP on 8/29 at 10:46 pm
“Because a lot of people care, and a lot of people disapprove.”
...and it’s none-of-your-business unless Merv says it is!
Humans as ass-sniffing dogs! Disgusting!
Report thisBy ProfessorVP, August 29, 2007 at 10:46 pm #
Those who utter nonsense like “this is trivial, who cares?” just don’t get it. Who cares? A lot of people care. Most people care about the itsy-bitsy little trivial part of a person’s life- his or her sexuality. Yes, that little bitty thing that develops around age 12, and influences the course of our lives- whom we are attracted to, whom we date, court, get engaged to, and- when society’s laws permit it- marry. And have kids. Yes, that tiny little thing: one’s sexuality. People like to know about it.
Nancy Reagan, pictured in 1982 in the article, had a husband who didn’t lift a finger in the beginning of the AIDS pandemic. He didn’t think he knew any gay people. In fact, the Reagans were good friends with at least one: Merv Griffin. But they didn’t know it. Thousands got sick and died, while Reagan primly lectured on the topic of abstinence. It should be noted that Nancy Reagan, after marrying Ronald, delivered a full term baby after seven months.
It is sad that even a billionaire whom nobody could hurt felt compelled to hide his sexual identity. Why did he go to such great lengths? Not because nobody cares. Because a lot of people care, and a lot of people disapprove.
Report thisBy Outraged, August 29, 2007 at 10:19 pm #
So America LOVES gay people....I knew that! They just don’t want to admit it.
Report thisBy Henry Ehrlich, August 29, 2007 at 3:56 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I believe in personal privacy, but on this particular issue, hypocrisy is very dangerous. Would history have been different if Anthony Summers’ book on J. Edgar Hoover had been published before Hoover died? Very likely. The closet is a dangerous place for public figures. Let them out.
Report thisBy PatrickHenry, August 29, 2007 at 2:50 pm #
Simply a distraction from important issues.
Report thisBy Dawn Griffin, August 29, 2007 at 11:28 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Salacious gossip should have but a small place here. Three pages of frenetic gossip mongering should not. I wonder what straights would do if suddenly they were so negatively defined by what they did in the privacy of their own bedrooms. See if you don’t become oppressed. Outing someone, dead or alive, by gays or by straights, is perverse. I would rather the representatives of the gay community come willingly to the table than be forced into the limelight, not as glimmering stars, but as examples of the ultimate shame, as judged by societal standards. This is the shame we carry. And when we try to give it back to you by living lives unhindered by the narrow definition you have accorded us, you’re still out there heaping it on. No thanks. Shame on you.
Report thisBy boggs, August 29, 2007 at 10:32 am #
I can’t imagine why you thought we would be interested in such facts.
Report thisNow, if he were holding a Republican Senate seat, I would be delighted.....
By Susan, August 28, 2007 at 10:49 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
It’s a sad commentary on our society that this is such a huge issue. I lie for the day when we are ashamed we were ever so ashamed of who we, and others, are.
(Yes, of course the Gonzales story is important - but everyone else is covering that, and no one seems to be covering this at all, or discussing it the way you are.)
Report thisBy Frank Cajon, August 28, 2007 at 8:15 pm #
And, so this dead, rich Hollywood guy was gay. First, what the hell is this story doing on this board; Second, who gives a shit, even when he was alive, which side of the plate some fat cat like Griffin swung from; Third, there are fascists taking over our country and sending our young men and women to die- and both joke parties are presenting Insane Clown Posses of candidates for Top Dog in 1/09 that will keep this going for another 10 years. Maybe that is more pressing???
Report thisBury Griffin and shame on Truthdig.
By spidey, August 28, 2007 at 10:52 am #
How about replacing this one with the Larry Craig story. Now that’s news!
Report thisBy cram namron, August 28, 2007 at 9:47 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
This was a great, relevant article. The title of the site is truth dig! It’s an article about how news sources hide the facts and lie. It seems trivial, but it is extremely relevant. It directly relates to the way politicians can gay bash with impunity. Think Rick Santorum and his comments. Think of the growing list of politicians and preachers exposed for their hypocracy, trawling for boys while passing legislation against equal rights for gays. It’s sinister and what makes it more relevant than Gonzoles or other articles is complicity at every level of the process, including the posters above. If only Mark Foley and Larry Craig had been outed earlier....
Report thisBy mike, August 28, 2007 at 9:38 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
WHO THE F@CKS CARES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I logg into this site for news If I want gossip about peoples personel lives that have nothing to do with anything important I will got entertainment tonite !
Report thisBy -V-, August 28, 2007 at 12:22 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
where is the LAME button here?
Report thisBy nonsequitor, August 27, 2007 at 10:28 pm #
this is bulls**t.
the world is falling apart and this is news.
goodbye.
Report thisBy Gilbert Lagac, August 27, 2007 at 8:59 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Alberto Gonzolez resigns and this deserves a bigger heading? That’s very FOX news corp of truth dig. I’m switching to the Huffington post.
Report thisBy JMTAC, August 27, 2007 at 8:28 pm #
Truthdig,
Report thisThis is one of the front story’s today????!!!!!! Truthdig, how disappointing...and hypocritical. Did you not read the very story below this article???… “You have no rights.” That story talks about the right to privacy. Of which this country is extremely lacking. Mr.Griffin obviously wanted his PRIVATE life private and he had every right to protect it from the public. Just because he was famous doesn’t mean he owed ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC the details of his life. And neither should any other person for that matter!
In the future, please keep this kind of crap “so called news” out of this web site, please.
By driving bear, August 27, 2007 at 8:09 pm #
So what if anything this proves that republican are not the Homophobes as the media and the libs claim.
Report thisBy Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, August 27, 2007 at 5:48 pm #
Yada, Yada, Yada, Blah, Blah, Penis, Blah, Anus, Blah, Yada, Blah, Blah, Tee Hee, Blah, Anus, Penis, Penis, Anus, Blah, Blah! You don’t say!!!! Tee Hee Hee. Sex, sex, penis, mouth, blah, penis, sex, sex, sex, blah, blah, yada.
Report thisBy Patti, August 27, 2007 at 2:49 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I think it is extremely arrogant as well as disrespectful to “out” somebody, living or dead, against their wishes. People have privates lives, and this should be respected. What business or right does anyone have to judge that a person needs to be ‘outed’? I believe our country has guaranteed a “right to privacy.” Most people are disturbed by possible privacy violations of the Patriot Act. I feel this outing others business is just as disturbing.
Report thisBy Jimbobman2, August 27, 2007 at 2:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I think, historically, it would be helpful to know a person’s sexual slant. It would add insight to motives, actions, and dispel rumors and historical inaccuracies.
Report thisBy steve, August 27, 2007 at 12:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Please stick to the more important news of the day and leave this kind of crap to the men and women who do it best: the proud news reporters from Fox.
Report thisBy Ed, August 27, 2007 at 12:37 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Since Truthdig is now reporting on the private lives of public personalities, please publish something about Britney Spears lesbianism (preferably with pictures). She’s a full-blown lesbian now, right? People are either gay or straight, right? We need to know which side they’re on.
Report thisBy Scott, August 27, 2007 at 10:40 am #
Only Ghouls would bring up such crap about a dead man!
As long as there is a demand for such crap there will also be a supply.
Report thisBy Susan B., August 27, 2007 at 10:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I couldn’t give a rat’s ass if someone is gay or straight. It is nobody’s business.
If a person is gay,and they are not comfortable with it being known, they have every right to “stay in the closet.”
It infuriates me that some one thinks they have the right to “out” some body. I don’t care if the person is alive or dead. No one has the right to do that to another person. Private lives are just that, private!
Report thisBy 1drees, August 27, 2007 at 9:52 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I completely fail to understand as to why now, in this era full of important issues, are people still fanatically curious about someone’s sexlife or someone else’s haircut or some celebrity’s drunk driving. I mean there is definately better things to give time and space to in the media, like certain issues that concern a threat to some parts of the humanity. Personally for me if Britney Spears wants to be shaved, well i dont want to know unless after that she comes comming over to my place for a one niter.
Report thisI dont think that what two consenting adults are doing peacefully is more important than a mass murder that goes unabated since 2003.
I guess this is the Media’s strategy to take the focus off the burning issues and keep the people out in the cold unawareness.
BOYCOTT EVREYTHING ISRAELI & ZIONISTS, STOP SUPPORTING WARMONGERING GENOCIDAL ZIONIST MANIACS.
By Marjorie L. Swanson, August 27, 2007 at 8:45 am #
Why the hell does anyone care? His sex life was his own business. Only Ghouls would bring up such crap about a dead man!
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, August 27, 2007 at 8:12 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m a big believer in personal privacy. What consenting adults do in private is generally nobody’s business.
It only is appropriate to “out” someone if THEY are actively invading other peoples’ privacy--hypocrites like Hazzard attacking gays while practicing it himself.
If Merv Griffin was minding his own business then Who Cares if he was Gay or Straight in his private life? It’s nobody’s business. People have a right to live their life as they wish, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult.
Report thisBy NancyH, August 27, 2007 at 7:50 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Why does the media focus on gay sexuality. When a straight person dies, are they identified as, say, Johnny Carson, straight guy? What’s the big deal with focusing on people’s sex lives??? Why don’t people get a life???
Report thisBy RAE, August 27, 2007 at 7:30 am #
The only problem I’ve ever had on this topic are those who ARE gay, who “practise” in secret, who remain in the closet about it, and who proclaim to all the world that they’re STRAIGHT. That’s bad enough in itself, but when these cowards are the first to trumpet ANTI-GAY legislation or whatever, I want to strangle them. “Outing” them publicly for the frauds they are is justice in my books.
There is NOTHING “wrong” about being gay anymore than there’s something “wrong” about being left-handed. There’s nothing “wrong” about sharing your life, including intimacy, with a same sex partner.
There’s also NOTHING “wrong” about not publicly disclosing one’s sexuality and sexual preferences… or one’s favorite color or flower. There’s no law that says you must answer the “question.”
But there’s a hell of a LOT “wrong” with deliberately lying about it, pretending to be straight when you’re not, and publicly or privately persecuting/discriminating others for being gay. That’s odious hypocrisy no matter who it comes from.
Most people will ASSUME you to be straight because that’s what most people are. Letting people live with their assumptions is the “grey area” in this whole issue.
It’s my view that letting those who don’t matter to you assume whatever they want is OK - you’ve gotta pick your battles in this life. But knowing that parents, siblings, friends, etc., are ASSUMING you to be straight when you KNOW you are not, is a form of LYING by omission.
It’s also VERY disrespectful. In my experience, most of the “hurt” experienced when you “find out” that a parent, brother, sister, friend is “gay” comes from the realization that they’ve been LYING TO YOU ALL THIS TIME, not from the fact that they’re gay!
As the saying goes… “The TRUTH will set you free… but sometimes it will hurt first.”
Report thisBy TomChicago, August 27, 2007 at 7:14 am #
I’ll miss Merv and hope he’s found the peace the closet never gave him. It’s a place of fear, shame and violence.
Report thisBy spidey, August 27, 2007 at 6:01 am #
So What? Do you “freedom” people have censorship problems? At least wait until you take over before the commisars/gauleiters start to work.
Report thisBy spidey, August 27, 2007 at 5:58 am #
So What?
Report thisBy spidey, August 27, 2007 at 5:58 am #
So What?
Report thisBy spidey, August 27, 2007 at 5:58 am #
So What?
Report thisBy diogenes, August 27, 2007 at 5:31 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yawn...and your point is?
Besides censorship, truthdig loves the gossip!
Report this