Richard Chamberlain advises gay actors to stay in the closet

AllardChardon

Literotica Guru
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Posts
4,797
Richard Chamberlain advises gay actors to stay in the closet
By Brett Michael Dykes

Gay rights activists have long pushed for closeted gays and lesbians to come out of the closet and cease hiding their sexuality from friends, family and co-workers. Owning up to one's sexual identity in public would strike a blow for mental health, advocates argue, while also helping to remove lingering social stigmas and stereotypes that have conspired to keep gays in the closet. So when a prominent gay actor advises other gay actors to remain closeted, the message probably won't be embraced warmly by the "come out" crowd.

Yes, Richard Chamberlain -- perhaps best known for his role in the 80s miniseries "The Thorn Birds" and the 60s television series "Dr. Kildare" -- was asked by The Advocate's Brandon Voss on the status of fellow gay actors who have not yet come out. Chamberlain said the issue was "complicated" one, but went on to advise secretly homosexual actors to keep their sexuality, well, a secret.

"There's still a tremendous amount of homophobia in our culture. It's regrettable, it's stupid, it's heartless, and it's immoral, but there it is," said Chamberlain, who currently stars as the HIV-positive love interest of a male character on ABC's "Brothers & Sisters." "For an actor to be working is a kind of miracle, because most actors aren't, so it's just silly for a working actor to say, 'Oh, I don't care if anybody knows I'm gay' -- especially if you're a leading man. Personally, I wouldn't advise a gay leading man—type actor to come out."

The 76-year-old Chamberlain came out of the closet himself just seven years ago, in a memoir titled "Shattered Love." Chamberlain wrote that he was coming out now rather than at an earlier point in his career because he was now free to "talk about it now because I'm not afraid any more. I am not a romantic leading man any more, so I don't need to nurture that public image any more."

He isn't the only one in Hollywood who feels this way.

In 2009, "Mad Men" creator Matthew Weiner -- weighing in on actor Neil Patrick Harris' decision to come out -- made headlines when he contended that "there are limitations to the kinds of roles" openly gay actors like Harris can get.

"I think it can be a commercially devastating thing," Weiner said at a luncheon. "The viability of you as a character -- no matter how good an actor you are -- can be jeopardized by this. We struggle with it -- obviously, it's wrong. It shouldn't be that way."

At the time he disclosed his homosexuality, Harris said that he was "happy to dispel any rumors or misconceptions and am quite proud to say that I am a very content gay man living my life to the fullest and feel most fortunate to be working with wonderful people in the business I love." Harris currently portrays a straight male serial womanizer on the CBS hit comedy, "How I Met Your Mother."

Indeed, when The Lookout contacted Michael Signorile -- a gay writer and radio host who's been a leader of the coming out movement -- he cited Harris' coming out as a success story. He wrote:

"It's always a good thing when someone comes out. But Chamberlain is from a different era, an old Hollywood of lies and deception when it came to homosexuality and other issues, and he is still trying to reconcile and rationalize his lying. Today there are many openly gay actors and performers, from Ellen DeGeneres to Neil Patrick Harris, who are doing just fine -- in fact seeing their careers booming as openly gay individuals. And they will tell you they couldn't do it any other way. Chamerlain should not be telling anyone to live a lie and thankfully, with the media and the bloggers more willing to report the truth, that is becoming increasingly difficult. Let's hope it becomes impossible."


I am fully aware, as a heterosexual female, that the subject of "coming out of the closet" does not affect me personally, but this is National news.
 
"National news?" Really?

I am fully aware, as a heterosexual female, that the subject of "coming out of the closet" does not affect me personally, but this is National news.
National news? Really? I'm not so sure about that. Especially given the headline. Chamberlain's opinion and sexual orientation would have been "national news" had it come out while he was doing the "Thorn Birds" but it's both predictable, unremarkable, uninteresting, and very "un-national news" for him to say it now.

Does the question/issue still exist? Certainly. Is it still a question/issue? Certainly. I think Chamberlain's perspective still holds water to a point in that a lot of viewers of an older age still hold a bias and find it hard to forget that a gay actor is gay. Because of this, nervous Hollywood, might not be fair to openly gay actors believing that audiences only want to see heterosexual actors (or those they believe are hetero) in a heterosexual part. Again, what else is new? Hollywood isn't fair to blacks and other minorities either when it comes to handing out leading roles because Hollywood still thinks audiences only want to see white actors.

On the other hand, I think younger generations might not hold this bias toward gay actors, just as they have less of a bias in favor of white leading men/women as compared to minorities. Gay and straight actors are, more and more, able to cross the "orientation" divide in the parts they take. So, we're probably about half-way to gay actors being able to come out and not fear that they'll lose leading roles because of it.

How is any of this news?

National news was Rock Hudson coming out when he did and why he did. THAT was National news. This is just the same old views from the same old suspects.
 
I hate to say this, but I agree with Chamberlain. If Rock Hudson, for example, had come out when he was a leading man, romancing hot actresses on the screen, he would have been out of work, and the movies he made would have become duds at the box office. This was especially so at the time, but it is still a fact of life, in my opinion. I believe people will not buy tickets to see a known gay actor playing a romantic lead opposite a hot actress. He would just not be believable. The same thing would apply if he were obese or very ugly; people just would not be able to picture him in that role. Of course, the same thing would apply to a lesbian playing a romantic lead.

If an actor is playing some part other than romantic lead, his or her sexual orientation would probably make little difference. It will make a difference to some troglodytes, but I believe most move goers will not care one way or another.
 
I think it would be more useful for all of the heterosexual Hollywood actors to declare themselves. It would be much the smaller, quieter group.

Anyone who couldn't have figured out Chamberlain or Neil Patrick Harris in their first film role . . .
 
You hate to say it, Box, then why put yourself through such an unpleasant experience? :D

Actors act. We have had Jewish actors playing Native Americans, white children playing inuit and Chinese characters, human actors playing dragons, demons, fairies, centaurs, and we shall soon see a black actor playing a Norse god, much to the dismay of the white supremacists. :D

I think Box's generation might have a problem with a gay actor playing a straight role, but audiences ten years younger will have less of a problem-- thirty years younger and not much of one at all.
 
I hate to say this, but I agree with Chamberlain.

I think Box's generation might have a problem with a gay actor playing a straight role, but audiences ten years younger will have less of a problem-- thirty years younger and not much of one at all.
I hate to say it Box...oh, no, wait. I don't hate to say it ;) Stella's right. As I said, older generations of viewers might think Chamberlain's right because they hold that old bias of being unable to see an openly gay actor in a heterosexual role. And guess what? You're an older generation viewer and likely many of your friends are, also. So you're just stating the "bias" of your generation which would, indeed, have not accepted Hudson if he'd outed himself back in the day.

Guess what? Then is not now. I mean you might as well say that a black man couldn't kiss a white woman on screen back when Hudson couldn't have been openly gay. Viewers had a bias against that and couldn't accept it. Yet now a blacks and whites can kiss on screen and viewers don't even blink--at least, newer generations of viewers don't. Likewise, they didn't blink when Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal played two men in love. And they don't often blink when certain gay actors play romantic leads.They just don't.

So, I'm very happy to say that you're only about half-right in your agreement with Chamberlain. He's not completely right. And, in the not too distant future, we'll probably be able to say that Chamberlain--and you--are totally wrong.
 
Dear Reader,

STELLA hopes to be a leading man one day.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I hate to say this, but I agree with Chamberlain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella_Omega
I think Box's generation might have a problem with a gay actor playing a straight role, but audiences ten years younger will have less of a problem-- thirty years younger and not much of one at all.


I hate to say it Box...oh, no, wait. I don't hate to say it ;) Stella's right. As I said, older generations of viewers might think Chamberlain's right because they hold that old bias of being unable to see an openly gay actor in a heterosexual role. And guess what? You're an older generation viewer and likely many of your friends are, also. So you're just stating the "bias" of your generation which would, indeed, have not accepted Hudson if he'd outed himself back in the day.

Guess what? Then is not now. I mean you might as well say that a black man couldn't kiss a white woman on screen back when Hudson couldn't have been openly gay. Viewers had a bias against that and couldn't accept it. Yet now a blacks and whites can kiss on screen and viewers don't even blink--at least, newer generations of viewers don't. Likewise, they didn't blink when Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal played two men in love. And they don't often blink when certain gay actors play romantic leads.They just don't.

So, I'm very happy to say that you're only about half-right in your agreement with Chamberlain. He's not completely right. And, in the not too distant future, we'll probably be able to say that Chamberlain--and you--are totally wrong.

I still say a known gay or lesbian would have a hard time getting parts as romantic leads. Any other kind of parts shouldn't be a problem, but that one kind would. I firmly believe many moviegoers would look at an advertisement for a romantic movie starring Lance Sterling and Debbi Dimples and, if they knew one or the other was gay, would not go because of that. This would include people my age, but it would include younger people too. How old were the men who murdered Mathew Shephard? :eek:

The could be another problem too. Suppose the producers went to the bank and said:

"We have a great romantic comedy lined up starring Lance Sterling and Debbi Dimples, and we need to borrow fifty million dollars to make it."

"Lance Sterling? He's gay, isn't he?"

"Yes, but that won't matter. He's handsome and talented and all the women will be wild about him and all the men will wish they were him smooching with Debbi."

"Goodbye, Mr. Producer. Come back when you have a straight actor for the part, such as Dash Riprock and we can talk business."

What I'm saying is that gay or lesbian actors will be at a disadvantage if they are out of the closet so, unless they have some other reason for being out, they are better off staying in. Maybe in the next century that will not be so, but we are referring to the here and now. :(

I know some people have mentioned other entertainers who are openly gay or lesbian and have done well, but how many of them have done well as romantic leads?
 
I agree with him. I believe that "don't ask, don't tell" isn't just good law; it's good manners!

I mean, really; I don't give a fuck if you are gay. I really, really don't care. Fuck your buddy in the ass all you like; it's no skin off my nose. I just don't want to have to HEAR about it. We all have our kinks and our perversions. I know *I* do. But most of us have the good taste not to MARCH DOWN MAIN STREET proclaiming about how proud we are about it!

Have your kinks. Enjoy your perversions. They are fine by me. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about it and keep it to yourself. Is that too much to ask?
 
I agree with him. I believe that "don't ask, don't tell" isn't just good law; it's good manners!

I mean, really; I don't give a fuck if you are gay. I really, really don't care. Fuck your buddy in the ass all you like; it's no skin off my nose. I just don't want to have to HEAR about it. We all have our kinks and our perversions. I know *I* do. But most of us have the good taste not to MARCH DOWN MAIN STREET proclaiming about how proud we are about it!

Have your kinks. Enjoy your perversions. They are fine by me. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about it and keep it to yourself. Is that too much to ask?
Don't ever talk about your wife. Or if you do, don't ever mention that she IS your wife, or that you have some kind of relationship.

Deal?
 
Instead of National news, I will simply report articles that are in the news.

I found this one interesting for personal reasons, I suppose. I had a huge crush on Doctor Kildare, along with all my girlfriends. My brother was lucky enough to buy and wear one of the doctor shirts that came out during the airing. If either my brother or I knew the Doctor preferred men to women, it would never have been the same. Fortunately for me, I did not have a crush on Rock Hudson.

I agree that Hollywood is far more motivated by what they think will sell than what is fair and equitable.
 
Chamberlain's comments made loads of sense in a commercial world. For good or bad, the hetero male take on lesbianism is totally different from their take on gay male. Stella's reply doesn't address the issue of a male actor, who is openly gay, wanting to take a leading romantic role. He would bomb.

This is not really prejudice but more hormonal. You don't have to be a homophobe to have difficulty following a storyline where the male lead is professedly gay. Try the famous restaurant scene in 'Harry meets Sally'.

Openly gay actors can play Jewish numibian slaves, centaurs or sci-fi monsters but Dr Kildare - I think not.

In film there needs to be a bit of theater. My SO, despite spending many evenings unburdening her heart to her gay friends, would struggle if Johnny Depp 'came out'. You create the fiction and then live within it.

From time immemorial, certain things were kept private and I don't see an actor's choice to hide his sexuality lets down the progressive gay community. It's just dollar savvy.
 
I agree that the box office isn't going to approve of an openly gay male actor playing a hetero role. Believability is still a requirement for a ticket-buyer to accept a character in a film role. I myself would never suspend believability enough to accept either Chamberlain or Neil Patrick Harris in a romantic lead (and I wouldn't go to a movie that tried). Reality would intrude on getting "into" the film too much. I don't see my attitudes towards the gay lifestyle mitigating this in any way.

Ellen Degeneres would get only a slightly better reception, I think, playing a hetero romantic lead. Ticket sales might be fine (people coming to see the openly declared lesbian playing like she is aroused by men) but all of the reviews would bypass the qualities of the film and concentrate on the lesbian kissing a man. Thus anyone trying to put creative effort into the film would be deflated from the get go.

Political correctness doesn't always match--or even trump--reality.

Actors who want to be believable in a variety of roles need to keep their private lives largely private (How much do you know about the private life of Meryl Streep?). The more openly they are "anything" the more likely that anything naturally intrudes on how well the viewer can separate the role they are playing from the actor. For instance, Charlie Sheen and Mel Gibson would be hardpressed to project out of themselves and into a movie role in the mind of the viewers at the moment. And if they seemed to manage to, that's what all of the reviews would be saying (and thus trapping the real them and detracting from the totality of the film anyway).
 
Last edited:
I agree with him. I believe that "don't ask, don't tell" isn't just good law; it's good manners!

I mean, really; I don't give a fuck if you are gay. I really, really don't care. Fuck your buddy in the ass all you like; it's no skin off my nose. I just don't want to have to HEAR about it. We all have our kinks and our perversions. I know *I* do. But most of us have the good taste not to MARCH DOWN MAIN STREET proclaiming about how proud we are about it!

Have your kinks. Enjoy your perversions. They are fine by me. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP about it and keep it to yourself. Is that too much to ask?

I'M QUEER AND I'M HERE is what Gay is all about. They cant resist any opportunity for self promotion.
 
I'M QUEER AND I'M HERE is what Gay is all about. They cant resist any opportunity for self promotion.

Tripe. Gay people are quietly all around you--or would be if you got out of your Laz-Y-Boy and went outside. :D
 
Instead of National news, I will simply report articles that are in the news.

I found this one interesting for personal reasons, I suppose. I had a huge crush on Doctor Kildare, along with all my girlfriends. My brother was lucky enough to buy and wear one of the doctor shirts that came out during the airing.
I think your personal interest in the article, your crush on Dr Kildare, is far more interesting than the article itself-- and a better reason to post! :)
If either my brother or I knew the Doctor preferred men to women, it would never have been the same. Fortunately for me, I did not have a crush on Rock Hudson.
Here's something to think about; Can you imagine how it must feel for so many gay boys and girls, to have these wonderful people held up for their admiration-- and be reminded (falsely in some cases of course) that their heroes are NOT GAY and would never reciprocate their crushes? Yet we all manage to survive in the subtext...
I agree that Hollywood is far more motivated by what they think will sell than what is fair and equitable.
Yep. I think "coming out" is not quite a matter for the paying public.
 
Yeah, I'd have been heartbroken if Annette Funicello had ever come out. :)
No, you wouldn't have been. You would have fantasised her gayness away, just like fans do for all of those other pesky things-- like marriage, or race, or religion or any of the stumbling blocks to an imaginary perfect happiness.

Hets, man-- so spoiled! :D
 
Yep, it is too much to ask. :D

What a masterful reply. It borders on the moronic and it qualifies you as being among the mentally slowest contributors to the thread.

It's simply none of your damn business when it comes to someone elses sexual predisposition, ... anybody's....
 
What a masterful reply. It borders on the moronic and it qualifies you as being among the mentally slowest contributors to the thread.

It's simply none of your damn business when it comes to someone elses sexual predisposition, ... anybody's....
Ummm... I'm not completely sure, but I have the feeling you read Deezire's comment bass-akwards. :confused:

Is that possible? Because I can't imagine you saying that Carney has the right to demand all GLBT get back in their closets and slam those doors shut once more...
 
Being somewhere between Chamberlain's and Harris's age, I find it hard to believe that we still care what a persons sexual taste is..when it comes to what they do to make a living.

I don't plan on ether actor having any impact on my life other then watching them on TV or movies, and I couldn't care less what they do behind closed doors.

It would just be nice to comment on "People"..not black people...white people..gay people...straight people..just people.

M
 
Being somewhere between Chamberlain's and Harris's age, I find it hard to believe that we still care what a persons sexual taste is..when it comes to what they do to make a living.

I don't plan on ether actor having any impact on my life other then watching them on TV or movies, and I couldn't care less what they do behind closed doors.

It would just be nice to comment on "People"..not black people...white people..gay people...straight people..just people.

M


Sounds all well and good, dude, but as long as there is Federal legislation & policies on the books such as DADT, DOMA and no ENDA, and as long as we don't have the full support of the judicial system and as long as states can take away a person's constitutional rights by majority vote, then we ain't all "just people" because some of us are treated like "just second class people".
 
All of those things you mentioned are offshoots of personal thoughts of the people that draft such laws.

I hope I live long enough to see such discrimination end.

(Oh..I'm way to old to be a "Dude"..LOL)
 
Back
Top