On several TV shows there has been the topic of “outing” gays - that is, other gays will publicly expose a gay man’s orientation to the public, in an attempt to show their strength of numbers. Often this has a disasterous effect on the outed man’s career. So:
Does this happen IRL, or is it just the product of fiction?
Is it moral to do this?
Is it legal to do this? Where does the right to privacy end and the 1st amendment begin?
** Is it moral?**
That’s really down to your personal morality. I feel that outing is only ever remotely justifiable if the figure being outed has made hypocritical statements on homosexuality. For example, politicians who make lengthy pronoouncements on the evils of homosexuality and the desire for “family values”, or church leaders who don’t practice what they preach. Even then there would, I’m sure, be exceptions.
Is it legal?
I’m not sure on this, but I would guess yes. You can say what you like about someone; but if you’re wrong, be prepared to be staring down the barrel of a lawsuit.
Outing people is wrong in general. Folks like Ricky Martin, Jodie Foster, and Rosie O’Donnell, IMHO, ought to be honest people and come out, but it must be their decision.
On the other hand, gay-baiting hypocritical scum like Roy Cohn and J. Edgar Hoover should have been outed while they were still alive. If someone like Trent Lott were gay, he absolutely should be outed. If a self-hating gay right-winger votes for legislation that makes life difficult for fellow gay folk, he does not deserve anonymity. He should be made to suffer the same scorn and trouble other gay folk have to endure.
Actually, one could be looking down the barrel of a lawsuit even if the person outed actually is gay.
There is a relatively new area of tort law known as “public disclosure of private facts” which can result in liability for one who discloses private information that is not of legitimate concern to the public.
One example of this would be if someone were to publish a copy of someone’s credit report. That would definately not be of legitimate interest to the public. I know if that happened to me, I’d be talking to an attorney about it real quick, and I would anticipate a positive effect on my credit rating after I took the publisher for everything he owned.
I suspect that the same would be true for someone outing someone who was not in the public eye. Politicians that act hypocritically, on the other hand, would probably be subject to a different standard than the average guy on the street.
“Strength in numbers?” If that’s the reason somebody gives for outing someone, that’s wholly immoral, counter-productive, and just plain wrong.
Nope, it happens, although sometimes it’s the press that outs them - Gerry Studds and Barney Frank come to mind, and they pretty much hoisted themselves on their own petards. Usually, though, the rumors circulate for years, and finally the person comes out on their own (I’m thinking Nathan Lane as an example) when it’s “safe” to do so for their careers. But I can’t think of an instance where someone made a public declaration that a public figure was gay and that public figure then tearfully admits to it at a press conference.
Depends. As described above, outing someone when they willfully act against the better interests of the gay community or members thereof is considered by many to be an act of self-defense. Outing someone just for the sake of outing them, or as a personal vendetta, I think is immoral.
All that is defined by the courts. I would imagine it would depends on if the person was considered a public figure; if the “allegation” was true or not; if the person was actively wanting to keep it a secret or if it was an “open” secret; if the outer was doing it for the wrong reasons; etc.
Esprix
Rosie O’Donnell is gay?
She is rumored to be, Guy, Tom-Cruise drooling nonwithstanding.
My problem as a biographer is in “outing” dead people. There are certain late show biz figures who are KNOWN to have been gay or bi—Dorothy Arzner, William Haines, Ramon Novarro, Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich.
But there are others who are “assumed” to have been gay or bi, with no actual evidence one way or the other—Rudolph Valentino, Barbara Stanwyck, Joan Crawford, James Dean, et al.
When writing about them, it’s like walking through a minefield. If I say that “evidence indicates they were gay,” I am jumped all over for having a “gay agenda.” If I say “evidence indicates they were straight,” I am accused of being homophobic. It’s a no-win situation, and ONE reason I decided against doing a Valentino bio.
Eve wrote:
Valentino was bisexual. In his diaries, he recorded sexual episodes with both genders.
Barbara Stanwyck was a full-on lesbian who had affairs with other actresses.
Joan Crawford was primarily heterosexual, although she was so sexually voracious I would be surprised if she hadn’t tried the ladies as well.
James Dean was bisexual. He was kept for many years by an agent and was rumored to have been an S/M bottom. He also had widely publicized hetero affairs, notably with Pier Angeli.
Other famous gay or bi folk include Greta Garbo, Tallulah Bankhead, Hattie McDaniel, Paul Lynde, Roddy McDowall, Lily Tomlin, Jane Wagner, Tyrone Power, Lionel Atwill, Tony Perkins, Tab Hunter, Troy Donahue, Billie Holiday, Sal Mineo, Rock Hudson, Richard Chamberlain, Nigel Hawthorne, and Sir John Gielgud, to name a few. Oh, and the German bodybuilder on FX’s “Son of A Beach” has lived in the same house with his “manager” for many years.
Oh, goboy, I feel so sorry for you.
Eve, please, be kind - the dear boy is new. 
I’ll just pop open this IBC black cherry, unfold this beach chair, put on my sunglasses and enjoy the fun… 
Esprix
Hoo-boy, apparently I have commoitted an unwitting faux pas. I apologize profusely in advance, I retract anything and everything I posted, and, please, have this lovely chocolate and nicely chilled chanmpagne while I back away.
Really, very sorry. Lots o’ contrition.
Oh, goboy, I won’t pitch a fit.
All I will say is: “Sources, sources, sources.”
Aw, man - that was no fun at all!
I, too, used to throw around a “famous gays” list, but have since learned that without acknowledged expert sources, it’s all urban legends, FOaF’s, hearsay and innuendo bordering on slander. And the dead can’t defend themselves. In the meantime I defer to an expert like Eve on any matters with which she may be familiar.
Although I do hear that George Michael might be gay… 
Esprix
Moral? Idle gossip in general is frowned upon in the Catholic Church and others, IIRC. That not withstanding, since there is nothing wrong with being gay, IMO, I mean saying Larry is building a house versus Larry is homosexual has little difference in meaning. of course if you think it is wrong, that is either calumny if the accusation is false or detraction if it is true, both sins. Yep, I studied.
Jodie Foster is gay? I hope that is an unfounded rumor, else years of fantasy have gone to waste…wait, she doesn’t need to be gay in my fantasy world…at least not strictly so. 
Eve wrote:
Thanks for being swell. Esprix scared me.
Esprix wrote:
The first thing we need to do is get rid of the idea that being called ‘gay’ is slander, as if it were a bad thing.
It might be inaccurate to call someone gay who is actually straight, but it’s no insult.
I hate to confess it, but I have no primary sources to quote. On the other hand, I’m not making stuff up.
Instead, my list came from these books:
Hadleigh, Boze Hollywood Gays
Hollywood Lesbians
Conversations With My Elders
In or Out
Rutledge, Leigh The New Gay Book of Lists
forgot the author City of Nets
Considine, Shaun Bette and Joan.
As far as living celebrities, they are all out to some degree. Richard Chamberlain discussed living with his partner in People Magazine(I read the article), Lily Tomlin and Jane Wagner have been semi-open about their relationship for years, although neither one has mentioned the L word, and heck, Nigel Hawthorne thanked his partner at the Oscars.
goboy said:
and Esprix said:
This seems to bordering on the… well… fascist, doncha think? Basically, you’re saying that if these people’s political beliefs differ from yours, they deserve to be punished.
[q]Outing people is wrong in general. Folks like Ricky Martin, Jodie Foster, and Rosie O’Donnell, IMHO, ought to be honest people and come out, but it must be their decision.
On the other hand, gay-baiting hypocritical scum like Roy Cohn and J. Edgar Hoover should have been outed while they were still alive. If someone like Trent Lott were gay, he absolutely should be outed.[/q]
goboy, isn’t that a double standard? It’s wrong to out liberal Hollywood lefties but it would be OK to out Cohn, Hoover, or Lott? How do you justify that?
I don’t see how Ricky Martin saying that his sexuality is not anyone else’s business is being dishonest. Quite frankly, it isn’t anyone’s business. Just to bash goboy a little, and an honest question, wasn’t Sal Mineo a fictional character?
As for people like Roy Cohn, if they have seriously misrepresented themselves to the public, I think it’s not terribly wrong to out them, same as if their lies were of any other sort. For a straight person to be outed can rightly be slander or libel, especially if said person has a significant other who was counting on that person being heterosexual. Other reasons may be that it would also make the person a liar, and, in many communities, a criminal.
The Ryan:
As a good wishy-washy liberal I can see what you mean, but I would also support “outing” outwardly liberal politicians who support, for example, homophobia or an end to abortion. I know those are political viewpoints rather than sexual preferences, but the point is that public figures who decry one political viewpoint (or minority group) while secretly supporting them are fair game.