Prev
Next

Come out, come out, wherever you are!

Tory Shepherd

by Tory Shepherd

14 Feb 12:30pm

Must Reads

If sports movies have taught us anything, NSW will win - this is a caption

If sports movies have taught us anything, NSW will win

50

Schapelle has done her time - this is a caption

Schapelle has done her time

182

Do women need to know when to walk away? - this is a caption

Do women need to know when to walk away?

73

Filed under: Gay, Gay Marriage, Gay Rights, Magda Szubanski, Sex, Sexuality, Soccer

104 comments

People think I’m gay all the time. It could be the soccer or the lack of feminine wiles. A colleague once assumed I was a lesbian because I always wear purple. It’s a Teletubbies thing, apparently.

No, people, playing soccer is not a 'clue'. Pic: Foxtel

Anyway, I’m not, and what happened at uni stays at uni.

But if I was, I’d be out. I’m lucky in that I don’t think anyone I care about would have any sort of problem if I was gay. Well, except Bloke. He’d probably be upset.

Many people aren’t so lucky, and it would be intriguing to know how many Australians are still in that dark lonely closet.

Magda Szubanski has come out today in support of gay marriage, with a vague sort of revelation of her own sexuality. She said:

I am 1000 per cent in favour of gay marriage. We pay taxes, fight wars for this country, nurse you when you are sick, make you laugh, sing and dance for you, play netball for you, star in your movies, cook your meals, decorate your store windows. And, chances are, gay people designed whatever it is you’re wearing.

I don’t know whether a gay Chinese person did design this crappy (purple) $10 top I’m wearing, but she’s right about everything else.

What I would like to know is: Why did it take so long? Surely film and television are among the most gay-friendly industries around?

Ms Szubanski has been happy to talk openly about weight loss, so she’s not shy about her personal life.

There must be something else that stopped her, and is stopping other high-profile people, from coming out.

That’s a real shame. One of the reasons there’s residual anti-gay sentiment in the community is because people don’t relate to the issue, they don’t empathise.

It’s much harder to be vehemently opposed to gay marriage (as opposed to apathetic) if you know a normal, happy gay couple, or admire and watch a gay actor.

Unless there’s a genuine reason not to, high-profile members of the GLBT community really do have a moral obligation to come out, to give younger gay people role models. It doesn’t have to be because of a specific issue. It doesn’t have to be a big deal (although gossip pages probably make that hard).

But staying in the closet is passively admitting that there is something wrong.

Maybe we can make a day of it, starting this year. Valentine’s Day – a day for all sorts of lovers to make their feelings known.

Twitter: @ToryShepherd

Most commented

427Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
368There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
353"Gifting", "journey" and other words we hate
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
295Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
262Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.

104 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Emilia says:

      12:09pm | 14/02/12

      I reckon a lot of this is to do with profits and popularity. Think about all those celebs we suspect are gay or have high-profile wives for beards (not mentioning any names: “Mom, Tom Cruise won’t come out of the closet”). They risk alienating their base audience and thus their moneymakers by coming out. But, in turn, that is a reflection on us, as well.

      Reply

    • Troy Flynn says:

      12:51pm | 14/02/12

      Absolutley Emilia. Look what happened when Vic Lerusso outed Anthony Callea who was dating his brother. Where is the Australian Idol winner now? Obviously being outed severly dented his marketability or else I’d have seen something promoting him in the last 5 years. Did all those girls who voted for him in the competition feel cheated when his homosexuality came out? Why else has he decended into obscurity?
      By contrast, Guy Sebastian, who played on his Christianity to win the competition, is still going strong isn’t he.

    • Nathan Explosion says:

      01:22pm | 14/02/12

      Mrs Explosion seems pretty convinced that Daniel Radcliffe is gay. If he is, I wouldn’t he surprised he’d want to be a few years away from Harry Potter first.

    • Tim says:

      01:32pm | 14/02/12

      Troy Flynn,
      yeah it’s got nothing to do with Callea having no talent. It’s homophobia i tells ya.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      02:00pm | 14/02/12

      Didn’t Julia ‘come out’ in print in the Adelaide Uni rag ‘‘On Dit’’ when running for president of the Student Union?

    • David says:

      02:04pm | 14/02/12

      @Troy

      Where are any of the Australian Idol winners now? I don’t think it has anything to do with Anthony Callea being gay.

    • SimonFromLakemba says:

      02:39pm | 14/02/12

      @Troy

      Hes done pretty good, hes doing a lot of under ground stuff, opera etc.

    • Troy Flynn says:

      02:59pm | 14/02/12

      Tim and Dave. Please don’t think I’m standing up for either of them. I agree that from the little I’ve heard of their, and I’ll use the term loosely, music, I would never buy it or pay to see it. I personally have never actually watched any Australian Idol because I can’t stand manufactured talent. (If you can even call it that). But despite my efforts to avoid these “look at me” individuals I still read about what’s happening to them. So admitting they’re both crap I still stand by my point that the one who was found to be gay, dropped of the mainstream entertainment radar. The God botherer is still going strong. I know this because I still have to scramble to the radio to turn it of when he comes on.

    • Troy Flynn says:

      03:05pm | 14/02/12

      Simon from Lakemba, that just proves my point. He’s not in the mainstream. Underground Opera??? I don’t even like regular opera. You see what I mean though, Callea- obscure niche market, Sebastian, loud proud christian, mass market appeal even in the U.S.

    • Cookie Monster says:

      04:13pm | 14/02/12

      Troy Flynn - there’s no such thing as underground opera - re-read the comment as there’s a comma in the sentence.

      Opera = underground = obscure niche market = maybe in the minds of bogans

      “He’s not in the mainstream.”

      He’s only been in the US working with DJ Poet (wonder if you know who the hell he is if you know so much about the “mainstream”??)

    • Cynicised says:

      09:15pm | 14/02/12

      @David etc.
      Just correcting some facts.

      1) Anthony Callea didn’t win Idol, he placed second to Casey Donovan.

      2) The boys discover on Aus Idol still seem mostly to have viable careers. Ie Guy Sebastian, Damien Leith, Wes Carr (gone indie like -  Matt Corby, Callea and even Millsy.  Can’t say the same for the ladies.

      I think the perceived damage to careers when gay performers come out is just that these day, perception.. It hasn’t harmed Anthony Callea nor Adam Lambert in the states (except perhaps initially). Neil Patrick Harris is a great example too.  A gay actor playing a womanizer in How I Met Your Mother!

    • amy says:

      12:14pm | 14/02/12

      Im surprised no one seemed to think I was gay at any point (or if they did never said it to me out loud)

      little interest in feminine things, and somtimes I think I think like a guy….anyway

      I think people seriously need to get over it

      Reply

    • Jay Santos says:

      12:16pm | 14/02/12

      Magda Szubanki’s sexual preference has long been known.

      I think it’s pretty safe to say that no-one gives a toss either.

      Interestingly, the Australian Football League - with 600+ strapping males in it’s ranks - can’t even muster a single homosexual.

      The odds are amazing!

      Reply

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      01:35pm | 14/02/12

      AFL isn’t a sport, it’s merely an outlet for sexually frustrated homosexuals to pretend to do guy stuff for a bit, whilst maintaining their need to touch each other inappropriately. Also it has balls. The reason no gays have announced themselves in AFL is because there is no need as it is presumed they’re all gay.

    • iansand says:

      03:10pm | 14/02/12

      Don’t tell Jason Akermanis that.  His head will explode.

      Oh.  It already has.

    • Dave-o says:

      03:38pm | 14/02/12

      Little wonder homophobia is such an issue in the community when small minded people continue to use homosexuality as a vehicle to belittle and humiliate.

      Wynston Cruso, please forward your details to the punch and super macho “never touched the lads” Ian Roberts will be despatched to beat you around the ring until you can find a new avenue to insult.

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      06:24pm | 14/02/12

      Sorry if I hurt your man-feelings Dave-o. I see you’re not familiar with jokes. The Punch team has my email address, but I’m not sure forwarding that to a 50 year old retired gay rugby player will change my sense of humour. Also, I’m not sure if the ‘beating around the ring’ line ws an intentional pun but it made coffee come out my nose nonetheless, seeing as it’s probably safe to say that Mr Roberts is not familiar with rings of the boxing variety.

      P.S. AFL is still gay.

    • Dave Mc says:

      06:21am | 15/02/12

      Well considering less than 1% of the population is gay there is every chance that there are no homosexuals playing in the AFL.

      The odds say that only 6 of 600 players may be gay.

      I think the odds of there being no gay AFL players quite good.

    • David says:

      07:09am | 15/02/12

      @Dave:

      a) There are gay players in the AFL, just like there are gay soccer players, gay tennis players, gay constuction workers, gay doctors, gay garbage collectors, gay people in all corners of society.

      b) You sound like Bob Katter: “Ain’t no gays around here, mate”.

    • Rick of the Dustbowl says:

      08:25am | 15/02/12

      Bob Catter ....There aint no gays around here…......oh hang on what about me brother

    • Peter says:

      09:31am | 15/02/12

      @Dave Mc. It’s 10% of the population mate. The statistics are well and truly out of the closet. Definitely some gay dudes in the AFL, they don’t come out because we live in such a discriminatory society, especially in sports.

    • Ando says:

      10:23am | 15/02/12

      Dave,
      You say “There are gay players in the AFL, just like there are gay soccer players, gay tennis players, gay constuction workers, gay doctors, gay garbage collectors, gay people in all corners of society.”

      I agree however speaking generally Gays can be more attracted to certain endeavors (dancing and hairdressing come to mind) . I agree that there are gays playing AFL/NRL etc but potentially a lower % than overall statistics,any attempt to relate overall statistics from society to any particular field are flawed.

    • David says:

      10:45am | 15/02/12

      @Ando,

      You’re trying to advance a stereotype that gay people are likely to be effeminate and attracted to roles such as dancers or hairdressers. I think you’ll find that stereotypes are a load of BS and I’ll venture that there are just as many gay kids that aspire to be AFL players as hairdressers.

    • Dave Mc says:

      03:32pm | 15/02/12

      Peter, 10% of the population being gay is ridiculous. What you are saying is that in Australia, with a population of 28 million, that at least 2.8 million people are gay.

      Thats crap.

      A lot of people identify as bi-sexual. You can’t brand them as gay.

      If you did a random survey of ten people, what would the odds be of one of them being gay? Pretty slim in most post codes.

    • Carz says:

      12:17pm | 14/02/12

      That’s a bit harsh Tory. We don’t expect straight people to come out and parade their heterosexuality for the world to see. By saying that those who are gay need to “come out” says more about the fact that you assume everybody is straight unless told otherwise rather than accepting people for who they are regardless of their sexuality. And would you put the same conditions on people who are transgender or intersex?

      What the young people of today need is positive role models, regardless of their sexuality. And they also need to be taught that difference isn’t wrong, it’s just different.

      Reply

    • GS500 says:

      01:17pm | 14/02/12

      No one should have to ‘parage’ their sexuality - I think what Tory means is that if existing role models (ie. celebrities) were to come out, it would show that it’s okay to do so - that people don’t mind.

      There must be homophobic people in the world who changed their opinions in a positive light towards gays once their role models came out, such as Elton John. Just as there would have been people who saw him coming out and felt it was safe to do so now.

      Clearly it depends on each person and what communities they are a part of.

      When role models of society agree to go on Ellen’s tv show they’re effectively saying they respect her regardless of her or their sexuality.

      I think what Tory means is that if our role models can be brave, so can we.

    • Nathan Explosion says:

      01:18pm | 14/02/12

      That’s because people are assumed to be staight unless told otherwise.

    • Tory Shepherd

      Tory Shepherd says:

      01:33pm | 14/02/12

      But straight celebs do come out and parade their heterosexuality for all to see.

      They sell pictures of their weddings and their babies, they call the gossip writers when anything happens… Not all of them, but enough. And statistically there must be many more gay people who are hiding their relationships.

      I’m not talking about putting ‘conditions’ on anyone, and as I said if there’s a genuine reason NOT to, don’t.

      And yeah, I think it would be good for anyone transgender or intersex to talk about it as well.

    • Wazza says:

      03:18pm | 14/02/12

      I’m in no way a eugenist, but from a biological point of view, all life exists to replicate, if you are an atheist like me this is just fact.
      If more people come out and live a gay lifestyle, instead of getting married having kids and living a lie, this genetic mutation should be almost bred out in a few generations.

    • Ryan says:

      03:40pm | 14/02/12

      Wait…. Elton is gay?

    • Handbag says:

      09:28am | 15/02/12

      I remember when one of my close friends had to “come out” to his friends because he was about to be outed by a student political rival.  It wasn’t as if he had a “beard”, or was promoting a wholesome attitude in relation to family values and he was going to be shown up for hypocrisy, he was just going to be outed.  And it wasn’t on the grounds of “you should be setting an example”, it was on the grounds that it would be politically damaging to him.  Pretty rough for someone who was coming to terms with their own sexuality.

      Interestingly, fast forward to this century and he’s probably already a role model for young gay men and women because he’s out and proud and in a position of power and influence.  And yes, he probably would have come out anyway - but at a time of his choosing. 

      I don’t believe that people should be “forced out” just because they’re in the public eye.  Should they be called out if they’re a hypocrite?  Yes.  But just demanding that they out themselves to be a “role model” or to make the rest of us more comfortable with homosexuality is bullying and wrong.

    • kate says:

      10:10am | 15/02/12

      @Wazza - you’re also in no way a biologist.  Your answer makes no sense.

      (a) Most gay people have straight parents.  Or are you seriously suggesting that all gay people are born to parents who were actually gay but “got married had kids and lived a lie”.

      (b)  Gay does not equal sterile, and you don’t have to be heterosexual and/or married to have kids.  The more acceptable it is for gay people to live openly, and the less prejudice there is against gay relationships, the more likely they are to form stable relationships and have kids.  So even if you are right in your assumption that gay people have gay kids (which seems ridiculous, but I don’t know the stats), then it doesn’t follow that more openly gay people equals fewer gay kids.

    • Lauren says:

      12:18pm | 14/02/12

      I think most people who are up in arms about changing the Marriage Act seem to forget that under the Howard Government in 2004, the Act was changed to specifically define marriage as between ‘a man & a woman’. Before that, it wasn’t clear cut.

      Just sayin’

      Reply

    • Kassandra says:

      02:02pm | 14/02/12

      No, before that nobody thought it could possibly be between anything else. The law was changed when some people wanted to widen the scope of the combinations permitted, to reflect not only the social mores of the time but practically all of recorded history everywhere. Also, it is not “people who are up in arms about changing the Marriage Act” but rather people who are up in arms wanting to change the Marriage Act.

    • mick says:

      06:11pm | 14/02/12

      “No, before that nobody ‘with a small mind’ thought it could possibly be between anything else

      fixed it for you

    • fairsfair says:

      12:18pm | 14/02/12

      Or maybe she just hadn’t come to terms with it herself?

      They have no moral obligations. They only have obligations to themselves when it comes to such a highly personal thing like this.

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      03:00pm | 14/02/12

      Fairs, I agree. People should not feel any obligation to be ‘out’ if they don’t want to be. Why should they have to explain their decision to anyone?

    • kerr says:

      12:21pm | 14/02/12

      How can someone have a moral responsibility to a lack of privacy just because they’re famous?

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      12:23pm | 14/02/12

      I had started to think Australians were really coming to terms with the place of the gay community. But some really worrying stats in today’s Australian have me concerned once more.

      When asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘I believe homosexuality is immoral’, in at least 5 federal electorates, more than 40% agreed. It was over 35% in more than 10 electorates.

      I’d love to see the full data to go over it all properly. Most of these were deeply rural seats, like Tony Windsor’s and John Forrest’s. But it’s shocking that there is still such antipathy to the gay community, in a developed nation like Australia, in 2012.

      Tory is right. It’s not just young gay Australian’s that need role models - it’s all Australians. We need people to demonstrate that being gay is perfectly normal - and perfectly normal people are gay. Not just actors, but sportspeople, politicians and businesspeople.

      This whole issue is about much more than just gay marriage and community tolerance. With suicide rates among gay teenagers dramatically higher than their peers, it’s about the lives of our young people.

      Reply

    • Steve says:

      12:54pm | 14/02/12

      Well said, Dan. I totally agree.

    • DaisyDuke says:

      01:04pm | 14/02/12

      The statistics can be manipulated by both parties though.

      For example: Instead of asking “do you support gay marriage” the statistic i always here quoted is 70% of australians believe that “gay marriage is inevitable in Australia” which is then twisted into a fact that Australians support gay marriage.

    • Ren says:

      01:27pm | 14/02/12

      I dont have a problem with gay or otherwise but I am not sure I would call being gay perfectly normal…

    • Shane* says:

      01:33pm | 14/02/12

      It’s very un-PC of me, but I reject the idea that being gay is normal. Normal people? In general terms, sure. Normal sexuality? Nope.

      Normality is a tendancy towards the average. Whatever stat you believe (is it 2%, is it 10%?), that simply means that gay people are in a minority that cannot ever realistically expect to approach the norm/average, which is (like it or not) heterosexuality.

      This isn’t built on any religious leaning, but rather the simple truth that normal means average and the fact that, for me, watching two men or two women kiss is strange (and is in no way titillating). Culturally instilled? Perhaps. Or it could be that biologically it makes zero sense, so my brain realises instantly that something ain’t quite right.

    • Tim says:

      01:41pm | 14/02/12

      What’s wrong with thinking homosexuality is immoral?

      If that’s your belief you’re entitled to it.

      I think those people that think homosexuality is immoral would probably find many other sexual practices (which are more common than homosexuality) immoral as well.

      And that’s fine, they don’t have to participate in them if they don’t want to.

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      01:41pm | 14/02/12

      I agree with Ren. Although I have gay friends and family and love them all the same, it isn’t normal. At least evolution wouldn’t think so.

    • Dan says:

      01:47pm | 14/02/12

      DaisyDuke,

      The stats quoted are on page 13 of today’s Australian. They’re explained fairly well, I don’t think there’s any twisting of the data going on.

      And Ren,

      We’re sort of getting into semantics. You’re probably right, in that most people are straight, and therefore qualify as ‘normal’. Which would exclude gay people from being ‘normal’, in that sense.
      But, I see it slightly differently. I see both gay and straight as ‘normal’, in that they are both perfectly regular sexual preferences. At least that’s how I think it should be seen, but I’m sure many disagree with me.

    • PsychoHyena says:

      02:03pm | 14/02/12

      Best response I’ve heard to “I’m gay” was “So what, I’m straight. Does that make a difference?”

    • David says:

      02:26pm | 14/02/12

      This mental masturbation over the definition of “normal” is irrelevant. By your definitions left handed people aren’t normal either but that doesn’t mean we should consider their status any lower than right handed people, or push through amendments to the marriage act specifically intended to preclude them.

    • Parranormal says:

      04:54pm | 14/02/12

      @ Dan “It’s not just young gay Australian’s that need role models - it’s all Australians. We need people to demonstrate that being gay is perfectly normal”
      We have Bob Brown, Bandt, Wong and company that would be enough role models to put me off admitting being gay.

    • David says:

      05:51pm | 14/02/12

      @Ren, Shane, Wynston et al

      It is normal for a small percentage of all people born to be gay. If you could find a society where there are no gay people, that society would be abnormal. Therefore homosexuality is a normally occurring trait within the human species.

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      06:31pm | 14/02/12

      Left handedness doesn’t affect the reproduction and therefore survival of the species. We’re not saying it’s wrong David, far from it. Sure it must be partially what nature intended, as it happens in other animals (See Dolphins - known in some cultures as the North Atlantic Rape Monster), just that it isn’t a function in the natural world that actually achieves anything, with the key goal of any species being reproduction and survival.

    • Smithy says:

      08:07am | 15/02/12

      well said that man? I still wonder why Chris Pyne doesn’t come out. it isn’t like it’s a major secret.

    • kate says:

      10:29am | 15/02/12

      @Wynston.  As others have pointed out, you are conflating statistically normal with a moralistic/judgmental concept of normal.

      Homosexuality is statistically abnormal, as is left-handedless, red hair and being male.  That doesn’t mean any of these things are wrong or somehow evolutionarily inferior.
      On the other hand, homosexuality is “normal” (ie right) for me and Magda Szubanski and millions of other people, just as heterosexuality is “normal” for you and Tory and substantially more millons of others.   

      Evolution is far more complex than you seem to think.  For a start there is no evidence that sexuality is any any way linked to fertility - it’s perfectly easy, and common throughout history, for gay people to reproduce.  And secondly, even if homosexuals do tend to have fewer children, there are evolutionary benefits in having uncles & aunts around to look after kids while the parents are occupied having more kids.

    • kate says:

      10:33am | 15/02/12

      @Shane:  ” for me, watching two men or two women kiss is strange (and is in no way titillating). Culturally instilled? Perhaps. Or it could be that biologically it makes zero sense, so my brain realises instantly that something ain’t quite right.”

      ... or it could be nothing more complicated than the fact that you’re straight, and therefore you don’t see the attraction.

      A man & woman kissing doesn’t do anything for me either.  Big deal.  That doesn’t mean “my brain realises there’s something wrong” with heterosexuality.  It’s just not my thing.  That doesn’t prove anything about anything except how I feel.

    • David says:

      10:37am | 15/02/12

      It is perfectly normal that some people are unable or less inclined to procreate. This is caused by random variablilies in nature and is perfectly OK because nature does not require every member of a species to be procreative in order for the species to survive. The occurrences of gay people and non procreative people in a population (and not all gay people are non procreative) are perfectly normal and natural phenomena.

      You say that you don’t have a problem with gay people but your arguments that try to establish homosexuality as abnormal serve no purpose other than to create a 2nd class category for gay people that makes straight people feel better about themselves and advance homophobia, when homosexuality is a normality in any society.

    • Clem says:

      12:25pm | 14/02/12

      What obligation is there for anyone to declare their sexuality, though. There seems to be this expectation that if you’re well known and gay, you need to shout it from the rooftops. Heteros don’t, so why should people who are gay?

      Maybe she never had reason to declare it before (if you call the above a declaration - maybe she thought plenty knew already), it doesn’t mean she was prevented from doing it. Only she would know that, so why speculate?

      What this shows is that ‘gayness’ is still seen as something a bit freakish. Hopefully one day you’ll find out some high profile person is gay because they take their same-sex spouse to some red carpet event - like a wedding.

      Reply
    • Tory Shepherd

      Tory Shepherd says:

      01:41pm | 14/02/12

      See my thoughts above, Clem!

    • Coby says:

      12:33pm | 14/02/12

      I’m all for high profile LGBTI people coming out. It’d definitely help change public perception, and more importantly provide some great role models for young LGBTI people.

      There are a whole host of factors you consider when coming out - including the reactions and implications on your own personal family situation. Magda might have wanted to stay in the closet due to a family situation, or because it might cause harm to others. Whether you believe this is right or wrong is another issue - but it should be Magda’s choice.

      A couple of high-profile Vic women on Twitter went on an ‘outing rampage’ a few weeks ago specifically referring to two high-profile women, saying they should come out to be good role models. Yet here they were, outing them, being bullies and thus being bad role models themselves.

      Reply

    • Martin says:

      12:33pm | 14/02/12

      What absolute crap!

      No one has to do anything!

      And no one has a right to demand that they do!

      For all your sprouting on about equal rights why should anyone, high profile or not be forced to publicise their private life. Such an attitude is totally offensive to the idea of people being free to be themselves.

      Just because someone is a politician, artist, cricketer, judge, dentist or whatever doesn’t mean they HAVE to have their life open for public scrutiny.  If someone wishes to, for their own reasons invite the public into their life, it is their right to decide what and how much to expose.

      No one has the right to ‘out’ or force someone to out themselves. It really is a mindset that is beholden by tabloid mentality activists, gossipy gays and busy bodies.

      Rights which have been fought for, include the right to live your life as you wish, in private or in public it should be the individual’s choice, not meeting the demands of damaged loud mouths who wish to feel better about themselves.

      It seems the gay witch hunts by puritans of the past, which we once thought had passed with time and greater understanding across society, have returned taken up by modern day gay activists and latter day bloggers to fulfil their own desires and troubled make ups.

      Reply

    • Kath says:

      09:38am | 15/02/12

      I think there’s a difference.  If you invite public scrutiny of your private life for personal promotion or financial gain - magazine articles on your house, your favourite holiday spots etc - or you pontificate a particular view on life or lifestyle (ie no sex before marriage, “say no to drugs) then you should not be able to control scrutiny of all aspects of that life, particularly if you are being a hypocrite.

      I’m not talking about turning up at events with a particular person.  I’m talking about the magazine articles gushing about “your perfect love story”.

      If you choose to keep aspects of your life private, then we have no business intruding in on it.

    • Chris L says:

      12:34pm | 14/02/12

      I don’t imagine “bloke” would be that unhappy at first. He’d probably be on the phone before you finish the sentence inviting some of your close friends around for a drink of wine or two.

      PS. Revealing one’s personal life is never an obligation. I have a number of friends who don’t realise I’m an atheist, simply because I know they’d be very sensitive about it and I’m happy to just keep it to myself in their company.

      Reply

    • Kirsty says:

      12:36pm | 14/02/12

      I think it was a brave move by one of the best referee’s in the NRL, Matt Ceccin, to come out as gay (apparently it was known within the league but was detailed in the Sunday Telegraph) given the culture of footy in Australia.  Good for Magda though.  People should be comfortable in their own skin.

      Reply

    • Lee says:

      02:05pm | 14/02/12

      Ian Roberts.

    • Lucy says:

      12:42pm | 14/02/12

      Never understood ‘coming out’. At least not anymore. Who cares? Does the fact that Magda is gay have any impact on how the 150 members of the House of Reps are going to vote? Absolutely not.

      Defining oneself based on who you sleep with is a pretty shallow existence I think.

      Reply

    • ando says:

      02:37pm | 14/02/12

      Carz,
      Dont pretend you have no interest in the sexuality of someone you know. You may not judge them on it but it is of interest.

    • Ian says:

      11:56am | 16/02/12

      It’s not the individual, Lucy, it’s how other people define them.  That’s why it’s an issue.  There would be no need for this post at all if gay people were totally accepted in society.  But guess what?  They aren’t (yet!)

    • Anthony Sharwood

      Anthony Sharwood says:

      12:50pm | 14/02/12

      I, for one, want to know what happened at uni, Tory

      Reply

    • Carz says:

      12:55pm | 14/02/12

      There’s a big difference between you and the rest of us posting on this then Ant. Most of us are saying we don’t care what people do.

    • Tim says:

      01:04pm | 14/02/12

      The only agreeable thing Sharwood has ever said.

      And are you sure you’re not? Lots of purple. Shameless, unthinking and blatant leftist political views. The signs are all there…

    • Ren says:

      01:28pm | 14/02/12

      Would be good to know…. For educational reasons of course.

    • willie says:

      12:57pm | 14/02/12

      I’m heterosexual.
      Now that my moral obligation to young straight people is fulfilled does anyone want a role model.

      Reply

    • MJ says:

      01:21pm | 14/02/12

      It’s always easy for straight people to say “Why don’t you come out of the closet”.... Because for some gay people, coming out of the closet means the risk of job loss; loss of family; being shunned and physical violence.

      Wow… it’s 2012… and this still happens, sad but true.

      This is why same-sex marriage (and using the word MARRIAGE and not UNION) is so vital… because if it is legal, then it goes a long way to NORMALIZING homosexuality in our society, and thus helping gays to be strong enough to come out.

      Coming out was the best thing I have ever done… but everyone needs to do it when the time right for them… and sadly, it may never be the right time.

      Reply

    • Gherkin says:

      01:40pm | 14/02/12

      Haha, brilliant. Tory The Atheist dogmatically imposing her completely arbitrary and unsubstantiated moral obligations on a minority group, purely on the basis of their sexuality.

      Well done Tory, for finally achieving all the things that you condemn and despise in religion.

      Reply

    • Grandma says:

      01:50pm | 14/02/12

      I wear purple, I’m not gay and I don’t have an issue with them getting married (marriage is overrated anyway). When you’re over 50 you can get away with wearing purple and bright colours,  or fade away completely. What I do have an issue with is the gay community claiming the rainbow for their own!.  I wanted to get rainbow foils in my hair but everyone would think I’ve jumped the fence.

      Reply

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      01:52pm | 14/02/12

      Coming out is career death in the film industry. The role offers dry up pretty quickly, especially if you’re a largely untalented actress who has made a career out of playing the same unamusing, histrionic cypher in every project. So what I’m saying is, I’d like to offer Magda my full support.

      Reply

    • MissMena says:

      01:57pm | 14/02/12

      Whenever I think of someone coming out, I think of two people, my cousin & Ellen De Generes. Both of them have the same thing in common - they came out so that they didn’t have to pretend anymore, and they lost almost everything. Jobs, friends, family members. Both have since gone on to bigger and better thing in their lives, but I can tell you from watching my cousins journey, I understand why people would want to stay closeted. Being gay is not what defines a person, it’s just a part of who they are. Seriously, if you want a role model - google Rick Parish Telethon. If you need support on your journey, contact The National LGBTI Health Alliance for information about resources in your state. This is the type of information we need to be writing articles about and sharing, not “ZOMFG - Magda’s GAY!!! She has skillz dude, let make her our leet spokesperson & see if otherz will too”. Shame on you, it’s called a private life for a reason.

      Reply

    • TC says:

      02:18pm | 14/02/12

      Its a good point you make Tory, the whole role model thing, but I don’t blame anyone for not coming out of the closet with all the prejudiced morons and the anti-gay religious nuts out there. Sure it would be lovely if everyone “came out” but until this world wakes up, most gays will be keeping it to themselves. A real shame, I feel for them.

      Reply

    • Kassandra says:

      02:23pm | 14/02/12

      I don’t think it’s fair to call on gay people who haven’t “come out” to do so. If they’re comfortable with it fine if not it’s nobody’s business but theirs. I’m openly straight like most people but that’s easy for me. It’s not always that straightforward (pun not intended) for gay people. Like it or not there are still issues for many people in their career, workplace or even family over being gay that could affect them adversely, or at least they fear it could. Maybe moreso if they are in the public eye or are a celebrity. I live in a neighbourhood with many gay people and while most are open I know of a few who have not come out, even though they don’t really hide it from people they know, because they think it would harm their career.

      Reply

    • fml says:

      02:36pm | 14/02/12

      Is that football photo shopped onto her foot?

      Reply

    • Shane says:

      03:07pm | 14/02/12

      Most of the time, high profile people choose not to make their sexuality public because of the inevitable label that will be attached to them by the media.  “Today, lesbian comidian Magda Szubanski said….” or “Tonight, Gay diver Matthew Mitcham will…”  If a straight person’s sexuality is irrelevant to how they are perceived in their job, why should a gay person have to reveal theirs?  A person’s sexuality is not their sole defining characteristic.

      Reply

    • BJ says:

      09:41pm | 14/02/12

      Next you will be saying that Cathy Freeman doesn’t compete in something called aboriginal athletics.

    • Tigger says:

      03:17pm | 14/02/12

      You have a bloke Tory? It’s hard not to feel sorry for the guy…

      Reply

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      03:33pm | 14/02/12

      Tory, I don’t care what you sexual prefernces are. You can have an affair with a cracked teapot if that’s your thing! You might get a tannin stain but other than that you’ll not come down with any really nasty little viruses!
      Tigger,  your gratuitous, insulting remarks lend nothing to the conversation. I doubt you have ever even met Tory so you are talking out of your arse. Speaking of which, has anyone been up there recently? A broom stick perhaps?
      Now Tory won’t remember me but we did meet many years ago & my memory of her is a thouroughly decent human being who is not afraid to say what she thinks
      I think her “Bloke” is probably extremely lucky.

      Reply

    • Tigger says:

      10:15am | 15/02/12

      Well her posts are gratuitous, insulting and biased so I guess we’re even.

    • Believer says:

      03:40pm | 14/02/12

      What is the criteria to get comments publish?

      Reply

    • Peter Black says:

      04:20pm | 14/02/12

      I blogged my thoughts here (http://www.freedomtodiffer.com/freedom_to_differ/2012/02/come-out-come-out-wherever-you-are-magda-szubananski-and-coming-out.html):

      While I’m sure Tory Shepherd meant well when she wrote that post for The Punch today, I am personally a little offended by her statement that high profile members of the GLBT community have a “moral obligation to come out” and that “staying in the closet is passively admitting that there is something wrong”. Implicit in that suggestion is the idea that GLBT people who stay in the closet are somehow contributing to anti-gay sentiment in the community.

      GLBT people stay in the closet for a whole variety of reasons but rest assured it is not because they don’t want to, it because they fear the reaction of their friends and family members, as well as society in general. Failure to come out is not that person’s problem, it is society’s problem, and any suggestion otherwise is offensive. Coming out is a deeply personal process and some well-intentioned guilt tripping - especially from someone who is straight - is not at all helpful.

      Reply

    • Grandma says:

      04:26pm | 14/02/12

      Years ago I was a property manager, and I had a couple of girls trying to find somewhere to rent. I showed them a place, and one of them said"We are a couple”, and I laughed and said “hey, as long as you pay your rent I don’t care what you do” Apparently they’d been knocked back for being gay. I don’t discriminate when it comes to people, and I take the mickey out of straight people as much as gay. My gay friends are used to me and just laugh, because they know I am not being malicious.

      Reply

    • Huey says:

      05:05pm | 14/02/12

      Magda, I don’t care. You’re a great talent and fine person ..more power to you. Now get back to work I need a a good laugh.

      Reply

    • paul b says:

      12:17am | 15/02/12

      she has always been OUT, she is a proud sister and we should all just appreciate the fine smart talent we have.. look back thru her amazing body of work and tell me you didnt know.. we all knew.. and loved her for the the amazing character she has… NEXT..

    • ted says:

      05:07pm | 14/02/12

      Bring back Howard…..he ran a good country.

      Reply

    • Dean says:

      05:13pm | 14/02/12

      I’m all for amending the marriage act; to completely remove any and all legal status associated with marriage.

      Reply

    • BJ says:

      06:12am | 15/02/12

      and living together.

    • stephen says:

      08:40pm | 14/02/12

      Well, she came out on The Project - always a good laugh, there - and I was very surprized to see Magda with tears at the moment when she was so much aware of how and why she’d been hiding it.
      She’s always interesting.
      Years ago I was an extra at an ABC production - forgotten the name - but the filming was being shot at St. Joseph’s School in Sydney ... anyway, Magda was in it, and in she walked, with 3 books in her hand, sat down, make-up finished with her, and she did her part then sat down to read.
      This went on for about 3 weeks, and later I was told that the books she is always reading, (and every 3rd or 4th day, they appeared to be different ones) are not the script, but, well, real books.
      An Actor with real books.
      “hey, cameras, get a still of that, I don’t believe it’.
      Hugo Weaving was also there, but he wasn’t the smarty, she was.
      Everyone was around her.
      Quality time, I’d reckon.

      Reply

    • Ian1 says:

      09:45pm | 14/02/12

      Warning: Religious perspective influencing following post.

      Life is short when you don’t experience length of days, or don’t know what length of days implies.  Does it imply a ripe old age, or rather each individual blissful day seems to go on for ever.  Does anyone even seek after God any more?  If not, why on Earth not?!

      Try seeking after the blessing, by identifying as your spirit and receiving Him that enlivens it, rather than identifying with your own and others’ flesh.  Is it not better to remove that part of you which rebels in entirety, than to suffer a lack of said blessing for keeping that part intact? 

      The question I have sought answer to, is why does God seemingly spurn homosexual activity?  I cannot hope to fathom how the Holy are besieged by their opponent and his minions, and the scene this world presents in this day and age makes it very hard to believe and maintain faith - it doesn’t seem fair after all does it?  Are homosexual friends overcome by some immortal genius usurper, some brilliant but destructive impetus behind all the silver-tongued perspectives portrayed in Parliament, TV and “journalistic” media by those who’ve misplaced their love for said Holy.  Does prophecy really speak of wickedness in high places? 

      What is a Christian to do? 

      And yet, so much joy is brought into the world by people, gay straight or neuter.  Love between people is universal regardless of sexual identity.  Love from one to the Creator though is not a fleshy thing, it is neither sexual nor abhorrent.  It is however, dependant on accepting the grace of God which transposes transgression.

      All under grace, and all transgressors.  Each to their own.

      Marriage is what exactly?  Better to remove the State from any right of definition, than to expand a definition that makes a mockery of our forebears.

      Reply

    • kate says:

      10:17am | 15/02/12

      Is it just me, or is this post entirely unintelligible?

    • David says:

      11:40am | 15/02/12

      No potential for any rational and reasoned discourse in that one.

    • Ian1 says:

      01:11pm | 15/02/12

      Warning: Religious perspective influenced previous post.

      Happy to engage in rational and reasoned discourse from a non-religious perspective.

      @kate - unintelligible?  That’s a bit of a stretch.

    • Pseudonym says:

      09:40am | 15/02/12

      “But straight celebs do come out and parade their heterosexuality for all to see.”

      Some of them do, but you need to compare like with like. Most famous people don’t. That’s especially true of comedians, whom you shouldn’t judge by the same standards as soap stars.

      Think of everyone in Magda Szubanski’s peer group, and ask yourself how many of them have paraded their pregnancies and kids in front of the supermarket tabloid. I’m not a regular reader by any stretch, but I can’t recall a single instance of Jane Turner, Marg Downey, Gina Riley or Jane Kennedy ever doing this. The only exceptions I can think of are comedians for whom their family is part of or relevant to their act, such as Fiona O’Loughlin.

      Of course, they could, any time they wanted to. But they don’t, because it’s nobody’s damn business. Contrary to wbat’s portrayed in virtually every Hollywood fantasy film which has dealt with it, telling the truth is not synonymous with blurting out every little thing that comes into your head.

      I think it’s great that Magda Szubanski has decided to lend her voice to a current public debate which affects her personally. But to say that she’s compelled to talk about her identity or private life in public is just feeding the beast of celebrity tabloid voyeurism culture.

      Respect the Barney Frank Rule.

      Reply

    • DJ says:

      12:25pm | 15/02/12

      Tory, in your case it’s the hair I think ... not the purple gear.

      Reply

    • Lorraine says:

      04:06pm | 15/02/12

      May I ask if there is really anyone who cares about the sexuality of people they don’t know?
      And if they do care about it, can I ask why?

      Reply

    • Rebecca Dominguez says:

      07:52am | 16/02/12

      No one, ever, has to come out of the closet if they don’t want to.  As Rachel Maddow stated:

      I’ve long held three basic beliefs about the ethics of coming out:

      1     Gay people — generally speaking — have a responsibility to our own community and to future generations of gay people to come out, if and when we feel that we can.
      2     We should all get to decide for ourselves the “if and when we feel that we can” part of that.
      3     Closeted people should reasonably expect to be outed by other gay people if (and only if) they prey on the gay community in public, but are secretly gay themselves.

      I don’t necessarily agree with the third option, but the other two I believe are solid.

      Reply

    • Ian says:

      09:34am | 16/02/12

      If it’s John Howard we’re mocking Ian, I’m happy to go with that.

      Reply

    • Ian says:

      09:34am | 16/02/12

      If it’s John Howard we’re mocking Ian, I’m happy to go with that.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 24 May 12 04:14PM

RT @Colgo: Read this article on commas. Then see the correction at the end. Ooof! http://t.co/ZkLs6494

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 04:13PM

Read this article on commas. Then see the correction at the end. Ooof! http://t.co/ZkLs6494

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 03:57PM

And here is a picture of a fox cub with its little head stuck in a can http://t.co/bDsY351x

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 24 May 12 03:20PM

RT @cuisinemagazine: Yep, there's always a time for rubbish bread “@ToryShepherd: Imagine a world with multigrain at the sausage sizzle... http://t.co/0K4JyWKH”

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

by Tony Burke

36

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

by Tory Shepherd

91

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

by Anthony Sharwood

69

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed