MORRISSEY IS GAY!

[Jimmy Jimmy (The Jump Boy)]

Re: pointless

> "coming out" is about being honest, not about
> pointless differentiation between gay and "bi." if
> you're "bi," you're not straight...you engage in
> homosexual activity, or have homosexual feelings.

> morrissey has repeatedly demonstrated that his romantic and
> sexual leanings are not primarily heterosexual, and only a
> person with an extremely limited knowledge of his work and
> comments (or an intense case of denial) would argue otherwise.

> as for morrissey's appeal, a look at his press coverage and
> sales figures gives a great indication of his lack of appeal...
> coming out of the closet would most likely get him a bit of
> positive attention, at the very least.

> being "branded" (as you so sensitively put it) would
> only make him more interesting.
In interviews I never really heard him comment much on sexuality even though the question always comes up. Sure there's no arguing from certain songs that he may have interacted in homosexual activities in the past. In the end though he has no obligation to himself or his fans to publicly come out of the closet. Do you think it would be some new revelation to the earth if he did come out? Everyone, even people who only know him by name, already thinks he's gay. Personally I found him more interesting when he was "branded" asexual.

 

[just don't know]

Re: what is your problem? eh?

> who ever suggested the things you describe? you seem to think
> that homosexuality is just about SEX. it's about much more than
> that, my friend.

> why should things change now? because so many other things about
> morrissey have changed! a better question is, "why
> shouldn't things change now?"

> one would think that age would have made him more expressive of
> the things that make him who he is. in the past, he was much
> more expressive of his tendencies. now he just wants to be
> "one of the guys," and maintain some phony
> "masculine" image.

> as for what good it would do, i have explained that already, and
> SOMEHOW you apparently missed it, despite the fact that it took
> up the majority of my previous post.

 

[Colin]

Re: pointless

> "coming out" is about being honest, not about
> pointless differentiation between gay and "bi." if
> you're "bi," you're not straight...you engage in
> homosexual activity, or have homosexual feelings.
--------
It's a question of scale. Being attracted to one person of the same sex doesn't make one a homosexual. Homosexuality is a generalized attraction to and desire for members of the same sex. Morrissey has always had trouble with issues of attraction and desire, even on a one-to-one basis. I think it gets easier for him as he gets older, but I think we're still a ways away from the day when Moz can say, with honesty, "I am a (fill in the blank)."




tab ramos

 

[Patricia]

Re: pointless (this argument)

Why does it matter? Whether everyone knows his sexual orientation or not, his music will have the same appeal. Unless I'm living in a f****d up bubble, music is all that really matters. We shouldn't be expecting or demanding that musicians help bring about peace, love, and understanding. It's always nice if they contribute, but that shouldn't be a requirement. They can't be heroes of the rebublic, and we can't hold them to godly standards. It's not fair to put that burden on them. Music is a product and tool of the heart, not the arm. It's an individual, internal thing. Please internalize, and leave Morrissey's orientation alone.

 

[Suzanne]

Re: pointless

> --------
> It's a question of scale. Being attracted to one person of the
> same sex doesn't make one a homosexual. Homosexuality is a
> generalized attraction to and desire for members of the same
> sex. Morrissey has always had trouble with issues of attraction
> and desire, even on a one-to-one basis. I think it gets easier
> for him as he gets older, but I think we're still a ways away
> from the day when Moz can say, with honesty, "I am a (fill
> in the blank)."

Yes, you are saying that as if there are an endless amount of genders to choose from. There are only two. If you don't mind mixing your vanilla with your chocolate, then you are indeed bi-sexual.

Since almost nobody here has dated him, and you are relying on outside information, you are going to get it wrong anyway. Just like him saying he had no computer when he actually did, I don't really think anything that anyone has said in the press or in his lyrics that's going to draw anyone to any 100% conclusion to what he actually thinks about the subject.

We see that he does what he does, but then we ask if he's still experimenting, or he has been this way all along and hid it, or he repressed it, or he'll be konked on the head tomorrow and turn into someone overly straight like Howard Stern. Either way, he does what he does. Yes, I know people who find him more interesting when he said he doesn't have sex. There are many others who think he's gay without ever reading an article, or paying much attention to his music.

Even if he came out and stated fully what he is, there are going to be several people in this world that the confession doesn't change what they think. They are still going to go around believing whatever they like. If that's hard to believe, I can see it right here in this discussionboard. People take whatever form of Morrissey they like and hold it up as their own. They don't need evidence. They take the imaginary little fellow who lives in their CD player and turn him into Jesus Christ.

 

[Cili Barnes]

Morrisexuality

> "coming out" is about being honest, not about
> pointless differentiation between gay and "bi." if
> you're "bi," you're not straight...you engage in
> homosexual activity, or have homosexual feelings.

I was referring to "coming out" in the PR sense. I understand what you mean, but you're being too specific and too cephalic for the general public. I know that was a rude and insulting thing to say, but from the PR perspective, the public is dumb and predictable; and you're all lumped together en masse.

> morrissey has repeatedly demonstrated that his romantic and
> sexual leanings are not primarily heterosexual, and only a
> person with an extremely limited knowledge of his work and
> comments (or an intense case of denial) would argue otherwise.

I have never read him allude to having sexual desire for any man. I've heard him defend, in a very androgynous way, the male body, or male movements, but I've never read him - even implicitly - hint that he wanted to have sex with any man. He has male heroes, and often he's spoken about these mens' ideals or appeal, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's homosexual (except within the context of an unintelligent and homophobic world).

Also, I agree with Colin's interpretation of Morrissey's psyche; and if this is a correct interpretation, Morrissey's intimations of having affectionate leanings toward other men wouldn't be regarded as necessarily homosexual leanings. I think whether this is actually homosexuality would depend on whether or not sexual attraction is involved; and even then, it would have to be understood what "sex" means to Morrissey.

> as for morrissey's appeal, a look at his press coverage and
> sales figures gives a great indication of his lack of appeal...
> coming out of the closet would most likely get him a bit of
> positive attention, at the very least.

It seems to me that you're homosexual and you're so pervaded by your own mindset, you're totally disregarding any non-homosexual opinion. I don't really think Morrissey's coming out of the closet would be anything other than terribly embarassing for him. At this point, there's really no need for the public to know, and I'd bet that the press would jump on his back the minute the letters hit the pages. Morrissey would be accused of trying to ignite controversy in the most pathetic way possible and he'd be laughed at.

> being "branded" (as you so sensitively put it) would
> only make him more interesting.

Well I assume that you're meaning he'd be more interesting in your eyes because I don't think that's what the general opinion would be.

I'd also like to say that I was not being hostile or miffy in any part of my message and I want you to know this so you don't misinterpret anything I've said. I wouldn't want to anger anyone on Team-Satan. ;-)

Dieetahh... I've another picture for youu...

 

[DIETER DIXON]

Message to Chili B... (No Moz Content)

Cili, You are truly charming in every sense of the word.... Thank You.

 

[Colin]

Re: pointless

> Yes, you are saying that as if there are an endless amount of
> genders to choose from. There are only two. If you don't mind
> mixing your vanilla with your chocolate, then you are indeed
> bi-sexual.
---------
My point is that it is possible to be attracted to a woman, for instance, without being attracted to "women." That seems to be the case here. The man has trouble enough with individuaal attractions, let alone much larger generalized ones. The generalized terms "hetero, homo, and bi" seem inappropriate for what is apparantly a series of very particular and specific attractions.


tab ramos

 

[Colin]

Re: pointless (this argument)

> Why does it matter? Whether everyone knows his sexual
> orientation or not, his music will have the same appeal. Unless
> I'm living in a f****d up bubble, music is all that really
> matters.
----------
Morrissey intentionally manipulates his image as it relates to sexuality. It's an ongoing theme in his lyrics. It's part of the music and can't simply be spearated from it and placed on a shelf.


tab ramos

 

[Colin]

Re: Morrisexuality

> I have never read him allude to having sexual desire for any
> man. I've heard him defend, in a very androgynous way, the male
> body, or male movements, but I've never read him - even
> implicitly - hint that he wanted to have sex with any man
----------
The most explicit he's ever been about it, to my knowledge, is when he admitted sending notes to both "boys and girls" that he liked.


tab ramos

 

[Silly Chili]

Re: Message to Chili B... (No Moz Content)

> Cili, You are truly charming in every sense of the word....
> Thank You.

Oh, you...

 

[Cili]

Re: Morrisexuality

> ----------
> The most explicit he's ever been about it, to my knowledge, is
> when he admitted sending notes to both "boys and
> girls" that he liked.

That's true isn't it? That sounds very familiar. I can't recall where I read that though. But like you were saying in your other post, Morrissey seems like a person who has very specific attractions as opposed to the general attraction towards "men" or "women". This is why, to me, he's always seemed both sexual and non-sexual at the same time. He's never really revealed any general attractions I don't think. Wily man, him.

 

[DIETER DIXON]

Re: Message to Chili B... (No Moz Content)

I love vespas, I owned one when I lived in Holland... Not much use for them here in Los Angeles... You really made my day with this one.

 

[Patricia]

Re: pointless (this argument)

> ----------
> Morrissey intentionally manipulates his image as it relates to
> sexuality. It's an ongoing theme in his lyrics. It's part of the
> music and can't simply be spearated from it and placed on a
> shelf.

Oh, not to separate it. It's quite impossible to do that. But to make such an issue is highly unnecessary. What I'm saying is, whether he makes his sexual orientation public or keeps it a mystery, the sexuality won't leave his music. That's constant. Gay, straight, or bi, his music will stay the same. Whether or not we know the answer to the question, his music will stay the same. He'll be the same Morrissey he's always been, creating the same music he's always created. That's why the music is all that matters.

 

[suzanne]

Re: pointless

> ---------
> My point is that it is possible to be attracted to a woman, for
> instance, without being attracted to "women." That
> seems to be the case here. The man has trouble enough with
> individuaal attractions, let alone much larger generalized ones.

I'm glad you live under his bed and are able to know such things.

> The generalized terms "hetero, homo, and bi" seem
> inappropriate for what is apparantly a series of very particular
> and specific attractions.

That's weird coz outside of listing Jake, nobody can really name a full list of who he liked and why.

My point is that if it doesn't bother you what body parts they own, then it's bi-sexuality. I don't care if you love them for their mind, or if they have a birthmark the shape of Tim Allen on their ass, you are going to end up in the bedroom, and if having Mr. Happy smiling at you gives you a thrill, or you like to go riding into the deep valley then that is where you stand.

I'm sorry. You can't screw their mind. Their nose hole is just too small for that.

 

[Colin]

Re: pointless

> I'm glad you live under his bed and are able to know such
> things.
----------
I don't, though I do spend an absurd amount of time listening to lyrics, reading interviews, etc. Of course it's speculative, but so what?

> My point is that if it doesn't bother you what body parts they
> own, then it's bi-sexuality.
---------
You seem to miss my point, which is that general terms like "bisexual" aren't appropriate for someone who lacks a generalized attraction. Maybe the man was actually telling the truth when he said that he was beyond those kind of labels.

 

[suzanne]

Re: pointless

> ----------
> I don't, though I do spend an absurd amount of time listening to
> lyrics, reading interviews, etc. Of course it's speculative, but
> so what?

Because speculation without facts leads to many travesties

> You seem to miss my point, which is that general terms like
> "bisexual" aren't appropriate for someone who lacks a
> generalized attraction. Maybe the man was actually telling the
> truth when he said that he was beyond those kind of labels.

When you think about it, NOBODY has a generalized attraction. If you can personally find the out of shape whine bag just as sexually attractive as a good looking person with a great sense of humor, then you are one of the few.

That's right. We stipulate and that's why we don't find every person we meet on the street worthy of having their bones jumped.

You won't hear anyone say "I like ALL men/women." They usually qualify it as "I like men with a nice ass." etc.

 

[Colin]

Re: pointless

> Because speculation without facts leads to many travesties
---------
Two points. First, i don't see any travesties occurring on a message board. Second, the speculation is based on the available facts. It's true that we don't have all the facts, but, then again, no one ever does. That's why speculation, hypotheses, etc. are necessary.

> When you think about it, NOBODY has a generalized attraction.
----------
I can say that i honestly have a generalized attraction to women. Which isn't to say that I chase ugly women all over town, but that I would rather get with an ugly woman than a beautiful man. And, crucially, the degree to which I find myself attracted to a particular woman matches the degree to which that woman exhibits those attributes which I find attractive in women generally. My particular attractions make sense within a larger context. I think this is the way it is with most people. Most people aren't aas damaged as Moz.


tab ramos

 

[suzanne]

Re: pointless

> ---------
> Two points. First, i don't see any travesties occurring on a
> message board. Second, the speculation is based on the available
> facts. It's true that we don't have all the facts, but, then
> again, no one ever does. That's why speculation, hypotheses,
> etc. are necessary.

Yeah, but going by interviews is not the same thing!

I find it highly bizarre that people trust the same magazines for their information on what Morrissey is doing in his love life that they turn around and call liars for on everything else.

Not that I've said that they've done anything...

Morrissey himself makes jokes and does not answer most of the questions in a serious way. They're very simplistic and soundbyte answers. I've read most of them thanks to that lovely site Arcane Old Wardrobe, and to me, I don't get a picture of anything truly specific. Everything jumps all over the map.

What about the lyrics? He jumps all over the map as well.

The weirdest thing I realized was when I picked up a CD copy of the first album by the Smiths a week ago (I have a dub tape of it) and read over the lyrics, and thought how strange that the whole celebacy debate jumped up at that time, and most of those songs have sexual references. At any rate, those songs don't look like the writings of someone not interested in it, and it's funny how he made a career out of being celibate just by uttering the phrase, "I don't like sex" to one magazine and suddenly, everything else goes to pot.

You call the magazines dumb for believing it, and the fans who memorize every word he ever wrote a bunch of morons for accepting it. Obviously, they did an even poorer job of listening to the lyrics than any journalist has.

So, what was I saying about his lyrics and generalized attractions? What you are saying makes no sense, basically. Some of those songs are written in jest, and many of them are written in such a way that you can't decipher who they are for and why.

>I think this is the way it is with most people. Most
> people aren't aas damaged as Moz.

Like you know. Like that has any bearing on what sort of general or specific attraction you have towards another human being. Like you would know what sort of ugly person Morrissey would rather talk to than a pretty one.

 

[Colin]

Re: pointless

I've read most of them thanks to that lovely
> site Arcane Old Wardrobe, and to me, I don't get a picture of
> anything truly specific. Everything jumps all over the map.

> What about the lyrics? He jumps all over the map as well.
-------
I think there are themes that emerge and remain fairly consistent over the years.

> The weirdest thing I realized was when I picked up a CD copy of
> the first album by the Smiths a week ago (I have a dub tape of
> it) and read over the lyrics, and thought how strange that the
> whole celebacy debate jumped up at that time, and most of those
> songs have sexual references. At any rate, those songs don't
> look like the writings of someone not interested in it,
-----------
Two points. First, the whole reason why the celibacy thing was interesting was it's contrast to other things - the pop star model of behavior, the obvious sexuality in the lyrics, the passionate reaction of fans, etc. Without those juxtapositions, the "celibacy thing" is a huge bore. Second, I don't think it stemmed from a lack of sexual desire, but rather the inability to concretely express that desire.

> Like you know. Like that has any bearing on what sort of general
> or specific attraction you have towards another human being.
> Like you would know what sort of ugly person Morrissey would
> rather talk to than a pretty one.
--------
I don't know. I speculate, theorize, hypothesize, etc. I think about Morrissey in ways that go beyond "I wonder what kind of shoes he wears nowadays" or "Boy, that Morrissey is so poetic!"