Anderson Cooper: "Outing" in the 21st Century

Though never a big fan of the gluttonous global newswhore, CNN, I continue to be stunned by the continuing whole Anderson Cooper issue.

Recently, our friend Richard Burnett, that excellent scribe who pens Three Dollar Bill, the thought-provoking weekly column in Canada's Hour magazine, has been taken to task for outing the star of CNN's Katrina coverage one more time.

In his 10th annual "Heroes and Zeroes" column, Richard gives Mr. Cooper a big ole zero:

Heroes and Zeroes 2005

Of course, Cooper was outed much earlier in this country-- last spring I think-- by another ruling friend of ours, Michael Musto in Out magazine.
And anyone who trundles around the netherworld of Downtown Manhattan is most likely sure that Cooper certainly needs no "outing!"

I just thought I would start this little topic to see what Motherboarders perception of the whole subject of outing might be, as it is already in its second decade of existence. And any thoughts any might have on its dashing current coverboy, Anderson Cooper!
Original Post
Well to me outting is only a valuable tool to those who are homophobic and who care about issues of sexuality. For out of the closet fags like me and you Hat, there is no real value to outting. I mean who cares who's gay or straight or bi unless one wants to have sex with the person in question. Otherwise it only seems "important" to seriously pathetic people with "issues". And Anderson is a sweet and funny guy in person. I'm sure it's a problem for him in the industry he works in.
Well, I'm a bit of an Anderson Cooper expert.

You see, my lady wife -The Empress has had a "thing" for Anderson ever since she first saw him on CNN. "He's so hot!" she would say night after night. Then... "He must be gay. He's too good to be true."
And I, with pitch-perfect gaydar, would say, "NO way. He is definitely not gay. Trust me, Anderson Coopper is a real man".
So then I Googled "Anderson Cooper gay" to prove that I was right.
I was wrong.
He is most definitely a friend of Dorothy.
And for the record, Michael (Musto) did NOT out him. I guess Michael always gets asked this now. Michael just interviewed him and of course asked him questions about his sexuality etc. in that way Michael has. Anderson Cooper has ALWAYS been open about his sassy-ness. In fact, he has won awards from "The Association Of Gay Journalists" (something like that). It's CNN who tries to keep his sexual orientation quiet. He is just too much of a stud muffin for them I guess. So now Anderson just avoids the subject (on CNN's orders I'm sure). But he's really pretty open about it.
Definitely NOT an "Outing".

Gay Stud Muffin Anderson Cooper

Attachments

Photos (1)
I think he's hot too. But then I love premature gray hair in general.

OBVIOUSLY he's a friend of Dorothy's! Like, duh. How could any son of Gloria Vanderbilt not be?

In general I've always taken an understanding position on public figures and the issue of being out. People in the public eye do not have the luxury of everyday privacy like we do, and I felt it wasn't fair of me to expect them to make the same decisions I would make. But we've past the point in history where it's cool to be in the closet anymore really. That's not to say that famous queers should have to run around telling everyone, but I think powerful gay celebrities of this century on some level have a responsibility to be out and proud for the sake of the gay civil rights movement. In Anderson Cooper's case, it's not like he's Ricky Martin and the teenyboppers are going to stop buying records if he comes out of the closet. I have no doubt that CNN wants to keep Anderson's sexuality mum, but he could be a little less demure about it in interviews. That said, he's never lied about it and I completely support him. He's cool.
You are right of course, Daddy... and Bobby too.

Bobby, of course it doesn't mean squat to such "avowed" homosexualists and ladymen such as ourselves. But I get your drift... reprehensible gays and Lesbians who lend a helping hand to those who would would discriminate and legislate against us should be outed... it would make those individuals put their self-loathing homophobic money where there mouths were, and show the world just how traitorous they are.

In the case of Cooper, however, I must say I didn't read the Out piece at all. Indeed, as I may have stated on the M'Boards before, I still confuse it with Outweek. Oh well, you know me and the gay press! But all over the Web there is stuff about Michael's "outing" of Anderson. And Michael's reponse at the time:

Did I Ruin My Chances With Anderson Cooper

I see what Michael is saying in the piece. I mean, after all, it's his job to ask about someone's personal life: sex, romance-- the whole nine yards.

But what is "outing" exactly thse days? Is it exposing some one who is so closeted that absolutely no one knows he is gay? Or is it mentioning the fact that someone is gay who only some of the people know about? I mean, I can still remember my friend's mother being wrecked when Liberace died... how could she not have known?

I guess what spurred my original post were the people reponding negatively online to Richard Burnett's Hour magazine article.
I mean is it "outing" when someone's already "out", and you mention it again? The mind wobbles.

Perhaps it wouldn't be an issue at all if Cooper weren't so intent on sidestepping it. If he would simply say, "yeah I'm Gay, so what... next question!"

As far as knowing that Mr. Cooper was gay, weren't you standing right next to me at a local nightspot, Daddy, when he was holding hands with... oops, but I don't want to out anyone else!

quote:
OBVIOUSLY he's a friend of Dorothy's! Like, duh. How could any son of Gloria Vanderbilt not be?


LOL Lexie, I had even totally forgotten that!
What a gay topic this is!
I just told The Empress that Bobby met her wank Anderson Cooper at John Dowd's house.
She gagged!
I said, "Are you dead? Don't you even read your own boards"?
She said, "Can't you see I'm busy River Dancing".
I looked over and sure enough she was doing her holiday jig to some Celtic Christmas song that only her and Hattie Hathaway could listen to.
(I know a lot of you know this dance. It's very similar to the one she does when she performs with "Les Sisters Hathaway" but totally different from the one she does at "Night Of A Thousand Stevies" which is more of a "twirl, trundle then twirl again".)
Daddy, stop mocking Mommy's great little jig that we all love her for. She's got real rhythem. And while we're thinking of it, I don't recall EVER seeing you dance a jig. Oh that's right during Martha @ Mother, I believe you made your dance debut then.
I prefer my riverdance to be classified as an "elfin gavotte" actually!

Daddy left out a HUGE PART of my unending love for Anderson - which was his enormous heart during and after the whole Katrina debacle, especially with those so obviously suffering, and where animals were concerned. THAT was what made me say "he's too good to be true"...his sensitivity was beyond any straight man's I've ever experienced. Sorry, I KNOW some gay men have zero sensitivity, but AC reminds me of the truly big-hearted queens I have been so fortunate to know - old school, hons.

And if you think I wax rhapsodic on this topic, go read petfinder or the nola.com animal boards... SAINT ANDERSON, at least.
I also like AC for precisely that reason! And for the fact that he's a hottie.
The funny thing is that when I first saw him I thought, "Gee, he's handsome for an older gentleman." It was only later that I found out he's almost ten years younger than me!
I have to say that it's not just the hair that misled me-- he has a certain demeanor and dignity one usually associates with a ruling Elder.
I must also agree with the consensus here as I also was not a CNN viewer prior to Katrina, nor a fan, but became an instant fan of Anderson Cooper for his authenticity, courage, fire and grace. He was right on it, and I believe helped to wake up all the other newscasters and reporters across the media board as to what realness really is.
Hey wait I saw him first!

posted here in the Original Wank Bank 03-14-03 02:20 PM

"Hmm... That's not the CNN guy I've had my eyes on. Who's the grey-haired guy with the really young face?

Really light blue eyes.

He's intriguing. Guys who look like they've gone prematurely silver always peak my interests."

Smile

XXXOOO
Satori

Oh, and Daddy, I'm sure he's still all man... Wink
Just a little personal info about anderson cooper....He's the son of gloria vanderbilt the famed inventor of "stretch jeans" His brother committed suicide by jumping off the 38th floor of my old apt building...maybe he couldn't fit into his stretch jeans that would do it for me too!
I think one other brother is a good looking actor doing a few cameos in some average movies.The irony of it all is that truman capote and 70's talk show host david suskind lived in the same building...this was way before hotel 17 ever exisited..ok enough nostalgia Wink
262 I was waiting for u to pip in.... surly u have some inside info on A.C. - Not for me, but for the Empress and the rest of em creamin their knickers.... of course not for me.... but thought i would rebel rouse here since there ain't a "why doesn't Ziggy Marley and Mike Tyson shag ME" section.
Hatches you raise some confounding questions. I guess I'd have to say everytime someone's sexual orientation is mentioned it is an outing. A progression of outings on one person could all have different purposes depending on each situation. So maybe these days the pretense of smirching someone is way secondary to it really being an attempt to polarize an audience. Another act of oversimplification and distraction that puts everything out of focus. Are we watching someone scandalously or proudly gay on CNN? Or are we watching a report of a really important disaster (the detruction of thousands of lives and a whole region by a hurricane, remember?) that has consequences for everyone?

I guess not so long ago any outing not done by the self as a liberatory act was uniformly an act of scapegoating. But now I think outing is more a cause for a public fight over the question of an individual's identity, an individual's right to determine their own sense of self. And maybe more importantly whether an individual's personal sense of self can stand at all in a public that is violently coerced to take sides on the acceptability of that sense of self. This shift from outing as only and ever being a scapegoating to being instead cause for a public debate is only due to the as yet limited success of gay civil rights. It questions the level of maturity of a whole society. The unfinished part is that as of yet, apprently, no can in public be wholly unstigmatically gay.

On the other hand, who cares what the public thinks, as long as there is any possibility I could run in to the delectible AC and enjoy who he himself knows he is.
sexual superstitions?

When we don't like the person it is an OUTING.
When we like the person, it seems further enrichment and detail of the person's character?

As Bobby says, why do 'they' wanna know? they wanna have sex with the person? merlin has been on the net since the early 1990's, first on CU-SeeMe. it is interesting, having chatted with people all over the world to notice that the only country where the first question out of the mouth's of chatters is about the other person's sexual orientation. and quess which country that is? yup the US of A. no one in europe seems to ever care what someone elses' sexuality is on line, while chatting on a non-sex sight that is, yet americans will demand to know immediately and stop chatting when they feel the other person is not straight. at least that was true in the 1990'sish.

and yeah, AC is hot, sweet, sensitive and a great spokes model. so what does that get the rest of us?

in love,

merlin
Well, the point, in some quarters at least, is that he's not such a great spokesmodel if he is so evasive about his sexuality. Except maybe a metrosexual spokesmodel.

And yes, I always also thought that it was odd that beginning in the 1990's, the first words out of the mouth of a customer at the door of a club were, "Is this a gay club?" Before then, those first words were, "Is it fun?"
So who's going to answer the question?

About why the emphasis on a person's sexual orientation as a primary qualifier?

They want to have sex with them? -I think that was Merlin quoting Bobby, if I remember the posts from above.

Is that a learned behavior, wanting to know someone else's 'sexual orientation', is it another category of conformity? People in Europe aren't preoccupied with it(like how people as Hatches says used to just ask if the club was fun)because they all fuck everybody all over the place all the time and everybody knows all about it -and yes that is a wild generalization but just as a way to characterize the whole different social orientation-! It is not a cultural difference because culturally people don't practice sex in any markedly different way as far as the acts themselves are concerned, I mean sex there isn't, like, driving your car in to somebody.

Personally, having myself defined by others as a matter of habit, by who I fuck and what kinds of things I do with who I fuck that are in part biologically determined because of their gender, is such a rountine of subordinations I find it a repellant false aggression whenever it arises, anywhere, anytime. So I generally comport myself in a way to dampen and delimit such efforts just as such stigmatizing seeks to dampen and delimit what I am as a living person.

But I think to have being gay radically reduced to a term that initiates conflict is of course a form of violence.

Sexual superstitions.

Since a turning point in the 1960's,observing the following slight transformations in the social need to inspect and quantify the sexuality of every citizen, it can be really fucking hard to have patience. (shrugs)

Think of how being a metrosexual kind of has the status being an independent in a two party democracy has. In this society a person's identity has a market value and political implications before anything else. How better to irrevocably program this than to base that market value and those political implications right on one's very preferences for biological gratification?

The sexual acts that provide the greatest level of gratification you can possibly experience are what determine how you participate in pre-scheduled mass emotions. In the end there is no morality to this at all besides that of a phoney juridical public inspection.

I don't know what good it does us, collectively, whether the news personality is gay. And just wanting to know, well, that's a whole other topic let's not get started on. Just safe to say knowing if someone is gay isn't going to provide anyone with the undisturbed bliss of being back in the womb.

Sorry to drag on for so long. I'm heading over to peep at what Anna Nicole posted in "Real Sex Stories" now.
sexuality is the new racism? keith ledger seems to agree on that one.

sexual superstition is very old. look at what lott's neighbors said to him 3000 years ago. (no really look at the story, it's amazingly contemporary) lots neighbors said, 'either your friends have sex with us the way GOD intended people to have sex, or YOU and YOUR GUESTS will be rounded up and sacreficed in defense of GOD and our religion.' what's the difference today? where has religion gone with this message from lott's time? is the only message of this story to watch which neighborhood you move into?

supporting this superstitious sexuality is an elaborate series of personal aggreements among people. like with slavery, everyone has to aggree on what is superstitious sexuality, everyone has to work together to punish others for not conforming. and social as well as the religious threats of future punishment by god are loud and clear to further support racism/slavery/homophobia. yes, all three use the same social mechinism to spread the hate and intentional misunderstanding.

as we read some posts on chat rooms and in adds at the 'back' of one of our favorite magazines. racism in sexuality is still very strong. am sure it isn't learned so much as part of the inner human struggle to have genetic survival. merlin is sure that our genes dictate more than the color of our skin, it may attribute to sexual regionalism and racism.

and yes, there is no such thing as gay sex. there is only sex. those that make the distinction are doing so for political reasons. supersition in sexuality also creates the lack of information about sexuality in america, so who can make a good decision about sex when the government lies about sexuality and sexual transmitted deseases. the government is editing out and refuses to allow the word homosexaul on government websites etc.

it would not be so hard sometimes, if some superstitious people were not working so hard to make laws that suit their under research claims about sexuality.

in love,

merlin
I couldn't imagine anyone gayer than Tucker Carlson. Even if he is straight, he acts gayer than any man exclusively attracted to other men.
The only thing that might out him as straight is his hopeless lack of style (that horrid bowtie). It's no trademark - it's just ugly.
Thank you for Clearing this up for me! I thought AC was a devout homosexualist, and I always wondered, and of course nobody really knows for sure, because of those wankers at CNN and I too hate CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, all of which are NOT where the news is. OF COURSE they want to keep mum about it they HATE devout homosexualists in that area of "news reporting." Espcially Bill O'REALLY? NUFF SAID (sorry for using caps.) That AC is some guy, huh? "All man." Huh,as in top or bottom? HEHE. Sorry for being facetious. But seriously what's a nice sensitive guy like AC doing at CNN? Oh, yeah, the money! Man I could make him my sugar daddy! LOL!
I'd love to see a secret (Paris Hilton type) sex video with Tucker Carlson and Ann Coulter.
I'm sure he could never get it up with her though. She would scare him to death.
Scare ANYONE to death!



Damn!
I knew I wouldn't get away with this.

The Empress made me edit Ann Coulter's open muff.
She said that she was going to throw up.

OK, here is the G-Rated version.
So much for free speech!

Attachments

Photos (1)

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×