Sean Hayes--Gay or not?

Sabln7

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Posts
314
Media
0
Likes
11
Points
161
Location
Texas
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
RE: Your comment about Russell Crowe:

He played a gay guy convincingly in one of his first movies filmed in Australia. It was about a gay guy living with a father who was about to die. Just proves that actors can be convincing if they can act.
 

T-Lex

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Posts
400
Media
2
Likes
50
Points
248
Location
Lexington, KY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Sean Hayes is a very private person, and when you see him in public with a woman, she is just a friend. It's been going on in Hollywood for years. Rock Hudson had male lovers, but the studios would have beautiful dates accompany him to various events. Some of the stars only come out when they're on the verge of being outed, like Lance Bass. There were pics of Chad Allen in a tabloid years ago which caused him to publicly acknowledge that he is gay. Sean Hayes has every right to keep his private life private, but the tabloids are watching and waiting to find their next victim.

I agree, everyone is entitled to their privacy and no one should be forcibly outed. I just would hope that if he is, indeed, gay then at some point he would feel comfortable enough to just come out. Living truthfully is so much more rewarding than living behind a veil of secrecy. There's nothing more torturous than denying your own identity -- although I realize that many people to do it protect family relationships, career, etc.
 

Chiman8.25

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Posts
3
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
146
Location
Chicago
Sexuality
69% Gay, 31% Straight
Gender
Male
Sean is gay, but not publicly so. As one post indicated, he does not confirm or deny this, he simply does not address it. He is from here in the Chicago area and I have known him indirectly for many years. He is gay.
 

jason_els

<img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Posts
10,228
Media
0
Likes
162
Points
193
Location
Warwick, NY, USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
He's lived in the UK for a while and there are anecdotes about his supposedly gay exploits.

Keep in mind for an actor as superlative as Spacey, keeping himself off gaydar should be no trouble at all. Many gay guys don't set off gaydar because they've trained themselves not to for various reasons. I would trust Spacey is more than capable at it if he chose to do so.

Being a huge fan of Kevin Spacey's for years - and having seen him live in person in NY (on Broadway) - honestly, my gaydar does not go off around him. I know many people say he's gay but I personally think he is straight. Just my humble opinion. I know most of you will disagree with me, and that's fine. I don't really care one way or another - he's an incredible actor. In many ways, I think his relationship is his career and when someone is like that and doesn't have time to date, speculations are made about them which may not be true.

Also, he NEVER did a porn video. If he had, trust me, I would have been ALL OVER that one LONG ago!
 

ManInLondon

Cherished Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Posts
1,686
Media
0
Likes
358
Points
303
Location
London, England
Sexuality
80% Gay, 20% Straight
Gender
Male
RE: Your comment about Russell Crowe:

He played a gay guy convincingly in one of his first movies filmed in Australia. It was about a gay guy living with a father who was about to die. Just proves that actors can be convincing if they can act.


What I was trying to say was that 'an actor is a blank canvas' and if he says the right lines and is treated by others as the character he is playing he will then take on the persona, however good or bad he is.

If Robert Redford is playing true to type and he is talked about by someone else in the movie as being bi-sexual, he then becomes bi-sexual, without having to change anything in his performance.
 

Mickactual

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Posts
3,522
Media
1
Likes
14,558
Points
518
Location
New Jersey (United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I agree, everyone is entitled to their privacy and no one should be forcibly outed.
I disagree. I know there's a lot of heated debate over this issue. Not to get heated here, but my feelings are...
Celebrities are excluded. They're paid vulgar amounts of money to do what most of us hardly consider to be "work". The price they pay for that privilege is that they become public property. That's their deal with the devil - their lives belong to the media, the paparazzi, & the public.
Sure - when celebs want the attention, they're fine with it. Ozzy Osbourne and Gene Simmons will gladly invite cameras into their homes if they're getting paid to do a reality show. And fame addicts like Britney, & Lindsay, & Zanessa are thrilled by every click of the camera making them more & more infamous.
...But then when they want no part of it, they think they can just switch it off. Too bad. When You quit showbiz and get a job at a gas station, then You get to switch it off. Until then, Sean Penn does not get to spit at photographers, hotel heriesses do not get to drive drunk, and gay celebs like Sean Hayes (yes BTW, I'm convinced he is), Clay Aiken, Michael Jackson, etc. do not get to hide in the closet.
OK - rant over. :biggrin1:
 
S

SirConcis

Guest
Saw an interview of the cast of Will & Grace on Larry King a couple years ago. It was stated quite clearly that none of them were gay. Back in the days of Melrose Place, the actor who played a gay part had been asked by Fox to NOT reveal his sexual orientation in real life because they feared they would then lose gay viewers. (he is straight) There was supposely a lot of legal ramblings about this request. But for Will&Grace, they had no such restrictions, and this was mentioned in that interview to show how things had progressed some. But NBC still had a lot of trouble with that Will kissing Jack scene.
 
S

SirConcis

Guest
>But back to Sean Hayes. If he is straight then he deserved 'the Emmy' for best actor every

I initially dismissed Hayes as some bafoon actor on Will and Grace. Then, I heard some top notch senior actor (can't remember who it was, but the type who could get those lifetime achievement awards) mention that Hayes was an extremely talented and serious actor and had done incredible theatre work.

That one statement coming from a very serious actor changed my opinion of Hayes and when watching the W&G show afterwards, I saw a serious actor playing that bafoon role, and realised that he had done the job well enough that I originally had thought that Hayes himself was a gay bafoon.
 

a200611713

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Posts
74
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
153
Location
Australia
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
I disagree. I know there's a lot of heated debate over this issue. Not to get heated here, but my feelings are...
Celebrities are excluded. They're paid vulgar amounts of money to do what most of us hardly consider to be "work". The price they pay for that privilege is that they become public property. That's their deal with the devil - their lives belong to the media, the paparazzi, & the public.
Sure - when celebs want the attention, they're fine with it. Ozzy Osbourne and Gene Simmons will gladly invite cameras into their homes if they're getting paid to do a reality show. And fame addicts like Britney, & Lindsay, & Zanessa are thrilled by every click of the camera making them more & more infamous.
...But then when they want no part of it, they think they can just switch it off. Too bad. When You quit showbiz and get a job at a gas station, then You get to switch it off. Until then, Sean Penn does not get to spit at photographers, hotel heriesses do not get to drive drunk, and gay celebs like Sean Hayes (yes BTW, I'm convinced he is), Clay Aiken, Michael Jackson, etc. do not get to hide in the closet.
OK - rant over. :biggrin1:

And so all of us! Or at least I do.

I could not agree more with your comments Mick! The obsene amounts of money - the fical desire for fame - it is all part of the same situation. One could not commence to seek a career in the public eye without first clearing out the closet (so to speak) That goes double for polititans!

HOWEVER - there is one slight difference when it comes to Sean Hayes - as far as I can tell - he doesn't really seem to seek the fame - he just seems to want to work as an actor. Does the "devil deal" work for him too?
 

Sklar

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Posts
1,640
Media
25
Likes
3,494
Points
368
Location
Everett, Washington, US
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I disagree. I know there's a lot of heated debate over this issue. Not to get heated here, but my feelings are...
Celebrities are excluded. They're paid vulgar amounts of money to do what most of us hardly consider to be "work". The price they pay for that privilege is that they become public property. That's their deal with the devil - their lives belong to the media, the paparazzi, & the public.
Sure - when celebs want the attention, they're fine with it. Ozzy Osbourne and Gene Simmons will gladly invite cameras into their homes if they're getting paid to do a reality show. And fame addicts like Britney, & Lindsay, & Zanessa are thrilled by every click of the camera making them more & more infamous.
...But then when they want no part of it, they think they can just switch it off. Too bad. When You quit showbiz and get a job at a gas station, then You get to switch it off. Until then, Sean Penn does not get to spit at photographers, hotel heriesses do not get to drive drunk, and gay celebs like Sean Hayes (yes BTW, I'm convinced he is), Clay Aiken, Michael Jackson, etc. do not get to hide in the closet.
OK - rant over. :biggrin1:


I disagree with this entirely. They are NOT public commodities. They are not public property. We don't pay taxes on them. They're not government officials. We don't own them. They are private people working in a private industry. No one forces you to watch them or what they produce. They are no different than anyone clocking in for a 9 to 5 job.

Just because someone gets paid more than you do does not give anyone the right to intrude on their private lives for some vicarious thrill.

If you don't think acting is work, you've never listened to any actor/actress who has been interviewed telling us what they went through to get the job, keep the job, work hard at the job. Professional actors devote more than a standard 40 hour work week for what they produce.

Everyone has the right to keep their private lives private and if you can't respect that, it shows what type of person you are.

Sklar
 

SassySpy

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,257
Media
17
Likes
139
Points
208
Location
Seattle USA,
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Female
well my tuppence for all its worth- is Sean is an excellent actor, loved him in W&G, and the last I heard he never would publicly declare his sexuality, which kind of put me off him a bit. My feeling was that he was a traitor to his sexuality, gay OR straight- by not just simply being honest. His acting stands for itself, sure didnt rely on his sexual preference imho.
But at the end of the day, I still like him no matter what, he's funny as hell.:tongue:
 

D_Adoniah Sheervolume

Account Disabled
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Posts
476
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
163
well my tuppence for all its worth- is Sean is an excellent actor, loved him in W&G, and the last I heard he never would publicly declare his sexuality, which kind of put me off him a bit. My feeling was that he was a traitor to his sexuality, gay OR straight- by not just simply being honest. His acting stands for itself, sure didnt rely on his sexual preference imho....

methinks mr. hayes is trying to say: he's an actor. his job is to portray characters, perform them and promote the productions those characters are in. however, his personal sexuality has nothing to do with any of that, and therefore, he's not going to talk about it.

i commend sean on his restraint. not every performer has to be an out role model; at least he's not lying--he's just not talking. perhaps in this way he *is* being a different kind of role model...

the general public may have an intense interest in popular performers, but this in no way obligates said performers to regurgitate every personal detail on demand. the public may be *used* to performers behaving that way, but it's certainly not required.

actors like sean hayes are claiming their personal lives as personal. they are the opposite of the paris hiltons and others another poster says have no right to privacy (a position i strongly disagree with, btw). instead of being disrespected and piled onto, perhaps we can leave alone those who choose to live their private lives outside of the spotlight when not onstage.
 

T-Lex

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Posts
400
Media
2
Likes
50
Points
248
Location
Lexington, KY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I disagree with this entirely. They are NOT public commodities. They are not public property. We don't pay taxes on them. They're not government officials. We don't own them. They are private people working in a private industry. No one forces you to watch them or what they produce. They are no different than anyone clocking in for a 9 to 5 job.

Just because someone gets paid more than you do does not give anyone the right to intrude on their private lives for some vicarious thrill.

If you don't think acting is work, you've never listened to any actor/actress who has been interviewed telling us what they went through to get the job, keep the job, work hard at the job. Professional actors devote more than a standard 40 hour work week for what they produce.

Everyone has the right to keep their private lives private and if you can't respect that, it shows what type of person you are.

Sklar

Well said, Sklar.