Serious question about Daily Mail readers and gays...

[sp1814]

And this is IN NO WAY a rant at Daily Mail readers, but a genuine question.

Have a look at this link about Neil Patrick Harris and his partner. They've done some (what I would call) genuinely beautiful shots for out.com:

http://www.dailymail....nce-open-romance.html

Now...spool down to the comments section and sort the comments check out what gets a positive rating and what gets a negative rating.

My question is simple - what do Daily Mail readers of this story have a problem with? I mean - almost exclusively, anyone who has written something nice or positive gets 'red arrowed'.

Is it homophobia or something more complex?

[237SJ]

I agree that the black and white photos are fab. Very artistic and well done. I would stop there though. The comments on the Daily Mail website are mostly biased and just plain ignorant. I never read them.

[woofgang]

How do you know they are daily mail readers?

[naomi24]

I don't appreciate anyone - male or female - gay or straight - flaunting their sexuality. These two say they don't want to be poster boys for gay relationships, so releasing photographs that I think are rather personal seems contradictory. I like the picture of them in suits at the awards ceremony, and that alone would have served as a dignified accompaniment to the article.

I'm not a Daily Mail Reader and I'm not homophobic. I just think people's sex lives are a private matter and should remain private.

[grasscarp]

why worry about what people do or dont say. I have read some of the comments and some of the writers do seem to know quite a lot about the people in the story. The are not very kind about them, but the story is not as straightforward as it seems. Read the best rated comment and you will see what I mean.

[jomifl]

I can only think of one good use for the daily mail..

[sp1814]

naomi24

I completely agree with you about people flaunting their sex lives - but when I look at those photos, I don't think 'sex', I think 'love'...especially the cover of 'Out'. That to me, is a really beautiful picture, and it would matterif it were two men, to women or a man and woman - it really doesn't scream 'sex' to me.

But getting back to the responses - I'm genuinely perplexed as to why there's no much - no, not hatred - let's call it...negativity...even to innocuous, non-political praise for them as a couple.

Is there really an undercurrent of antipathy for gays amongst readers of right wing tabloids that we didn't know of before?

[sp1814]

Bloody hell...look, the typos in my previous post are down to the fact that I'm typing on an iPad with my right hand, whilst simultaneously eating a toasted tea-cake with my left hand (really).

[flip_flop]

In no way answering the question, I had no idea Doogie Howser MD was gay!!!

This brings back memories

[boxtops]

There absolutely no indication that the people who have posted the comments are readers of the DM - after all, we've just looked at the page, and I don't read the DM normally. As for the ratings - that could just be malevolence, some single person going through and rating them down. In case - what are the ratings for, I never even noticed them, I just read the posts and wondered what all the red arrow comments were about.

[naomi24]

SP, releasing those pictures and then saying they don't want to be poster boys, etc, is hypocritical. I have no idea who these people are but I look at those images and think, 'ok, so you're gay. So what? I can read so why make such a big deal of it?'

I don't think the negative comments on that article necessarily emanate from hatred as such - but rather from an inability to acknowledge that we aren't all made the same.

[Ankou]

"I look at those images and think, 'ok, so you're gay. So what?"

its for a gay magzine about love in the 21st c, thats what. how is it hypocritical, they are asked to do an interview with some photos and they come out great, they look like the perfect couple.

but they don't want to be perceived as perfect couple poster boys because that would represent an image of fakery and perfection. they are saying, their love is real but its not perfect.

honestly. some people.

[naomi24]

Oops! Yet another opinion I shouldn't have given. What is this? The law according to Ankou that only applies to Naomi? ;o)

[sp1814]

naomi24

It's the same as Angelina Joliet and Brad Pitt doing a shoot for Vanity Fair, and when interviewed saying, "We don't want our relationship held up as some kind of perfect union".

I really don't see the hypocrasy of having some nice photos done and published..and it's in a perfectly appropriate forum (a gay magazine) - and think about it...who else would publish that picture as a cover spread? GQ? Heat? Radio Times?

Don't see that happening any time soon.

But back to something you wrote earlier - that you don't like to see anyone 'flaunting their sexuality' Do wedding pictures turn your stomach?

[Ankou]

well...... the ones of katie price and peter andre turned mine!

[naomi24]

SP, who mentioned turning stomachs? I just think it's hypocritical to open yourself up to publicity and then say you don't want to become an object of particular interest - and that applies to Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt too. If you want a private life, then keep it private. These people have a choice.

[jackthehat]

The Daily Wail have lifted this *News story* from an interview given to 'Out' magazine.

NPH & DB gave a candid interview about their relationship to this magazine; a magazine primarily for gay people. They are one of the (if not THE) high-profile gay male couples in Tinseltown but, as they point out, it doesn't necessarily make their relationship the one to which all gay men ought to aspire.

I, too, wondered why the Daily Wail chose to run this article as it was not given directly to them and it is hardly *news* in any case.

Perhaps it was simply an excuse to give their readers an opportunity to exercise their red arrows?

[sp1814]

naomi24

Sorry - I totally misquoted you. You wrote: "I don't appreciate anyone - male or female - gay or straight - flaunting their sexuality"

So my question is - how would you deal with wedding photos?

[sp1814]

naomi24

I think JTH's posting summarises it quite nicely.

They're not saying, "Don't give us attention", they're saying, "Don't put us up on a pedestal as having the ideal perfect relationship".

And getting back to something you wrote earlier - would a picture of Brad and Angelina holding hands whilst (say) strolling down a beach, be something you'd file under 'flaunting their sexuality'?

I'm geniunely interested - because I'm wondering whether you really see gay couples and straight couples the same.

[ludwig]

..oh dear, did I just see the 'you're a closet homophobe' card being played?

I don't have any problem with the pictures, but I'm not interested in them either - any more than I would be brad\angelina, Katie\whoeveritisatthemoment.

I suspect there's some truth in what jack says, that the Mail has created a non-story to wind it's readership up - because there is no story other than 'Here are some pictures of some gay people that appeared in another magazine'