Home Videos Photos Shop
PerezHilton CocoPerez Kim K. Oscars Khloé James Franco PerezTV

Aaron Sorkin Comes To The Defense Of Homophobic Newsweek Article!


Thought-provoking? Yes.

Still out of line? Yes.

Aaron Sorkin wrote a response to the horrific and offensive Newsweek article by Ramin Setoodeh, and surprisingly comes to its defense!

He says:

This is a sentence I never thought I would type: I'm coming to the defense of a theatre critic.

Newsweek's Ramin Setoodeh wrote an article last week titled "Straight Jacket" in which he argues that gay actors can't and shouldn't play straight characters. His "Exhibit A" in the piece is Sean Hayes, the stunningly gifted actor who came to our attention playing Jack MacFarland on the much beloved NBC half-hour comedy Will and Grace. (This was back when NBC broadcast television shows.) Mr. Hayes just opened in the Broadway revival of Promises, Promises, a 1968 musical by Neil Simon, Burt Bacharach and Hal David that was based on The Apartment, the Academy Award-winning film by Billy Wilder and I.A.L. (Izzy) Diamond that starred Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine. Are you following so far?

It doesn't really matter, because all you need to know is that Sean Hayes plays C.C. Baxter in this great show, and that C.C. Baxter is a man who is attracted to women.

Ramin Setoodeh, unlike the overwhelming majority of the people in the audience at the two preview performances I attended, was unhappy with Sean Hayes' performance. This reaction was not due to Mr. Hayes' acting, singing, dancing, comedy, unique charm and exceptional rapport with the audience. Mr. Setoodeh's problem with the star's performance was that in real life, Mr. Hayes is gay. And as if the studio had given the screenwriter a note that the story had to be spicier, Mr. Setoodeh is gay as well.

Much is being made of the Newsweek piece. Much should be. I'm proud to say that my friend, Kristin Chenoweth, who stars opposite Mr. Hayes in the show (and about whose performance I can't possibly be objective — she's sensational and we'll leave it at that) led the charge — posting an online rebuttal to Mr. Setoodeh in which she called him homophobic.

For an actress who makes her living and her reputation on Broadway, throwing down with a prominent theatre critic isn't something you do as a career move. In her response to Setoodeh, Ms. Chenoweth made good point after good point after good point…

…and missed the point.

So did Setoodeh.

First things first. An actor, no matter which sex they're attracted to, can't "play" gay or "play" straight. Gay and straight aren't actable things. You can act effeminate and you can act macho (though macho usually ends up reading as gay), but an actor can't play gay or straight anymore than they can play Catholic. The most disturbing thing to me about this episode is that the theater critic for Newsweek didn't know that. Of COURSE gay actors can play straight characters — it's impossible to believe that Mr. Setoodeh would prefer if Ian McKellen would stop doing King Lear.

But with sincere respect to Ms. Chenoweth and the hundreds and hundreds of Internet posters who've crashed down on Setoodeh in the last few days — some understandably passionate and some unfortunately hostile — I don't think Setoodeh was being homophobic. Just wrong.

The problem doesn't have anything to do with sexual preference. The problem has everything to do with the fact that we know too much about each other and we care too much about what we know. In one short decade we have been reconditioned to be entertained by the most private areas of other people's lives. We've become the family dog who's allowed to eat anything that falls on the floor, and the press is the little kid in the family who keeps dropping food. Sandy Bullock's life falls apart? That's for us. A golfer gets caught with strippers? We'll take that, thank you. Lindsay Lohan's an alcoholic? Mmm, mmm good! When Jennifer Aniston plays a movie character who's looking for love, her performance — always sublime — doesn't stand a chance against the real story we've been told it's okay to pay attention to, which is that Jennifer Aniston is looking for love. I can't hum a single John Mayer song but I can name five women he's slept with. Sean, for Setoodeh, the show began before you even showed up to the theater that night.

The volcanic eruption of tabloids, Internet insanity and — you better believe it — reality TV, has de-creepyized voyeurism. More than that, it's made the private lives of public people — in the vocabulary of television writers — the "A" story. And in a not-so-convoluted way, the "A" story has an author — thousands of authors in an extraordinary collaboration. When I need the audience to know that a piece of information they're about to hear is important, I can use words, a close-up, a push-in, music… when the authors of the no-longer-private-lives "A" story want the audience to know that something's important, it shows up on our Yahoo homepage. (The third story on my homepage yesterday was that Britain, our closest ally, has a new Prime Minister. The first story was about Justin Bieber. Unless the new Prime Minister is Justin Bieber, something's obviously gone wrong.) Is Sean Hayes' sexuality relevant to his performance? It has to be — the "authors" told us it was important. (Though Setoodeh would have done well to have asked himself if Mr. Hayes' performance would have been any different if C.C. Baxter was in love with a man instead of Ms. Chenoweth's Fran Kubelik. It wouldn't have been.)

I would never presume to — and those words are almost always followed by whoever said them proceeding to do exactly what they just said they would never presume to do — but I would never presume to tell someone how they should feel about something. I can only imagine that Setoodeh's piece felt like a solid kidney punch, not to just Mr. Hayes and the other actors tagged in the story, but to teenagers — kids who live in daily fear of what their parents are going to say, of getting the hell beaten out of them at school, of being an oddity. Gay actors, you'll forgive the expression, are caught between a rock and a hard place. Only criminals and adulterers should have to hide who they are. And in addition to living their own lives in sun and not shadow, these actors want to — admirably — be role models for these kids. But they also know the blanker their canvas the better their chance of marginalizing the "A" story. They know that even in 2010, there's still no such thing as an actor who's gay, a movie star and alive all at the same time.

So while I would never presume to tell someone how to feel, if it were me, I would re-direct my energy away from Mr. Setoodeh. (Ryan Murphy– the very gifted creator of Glee whose cast member, the invaluable Jonathan Groff, was also smacked in the teeth by Setoodeh– has called for a boycott of Newsweek. I get it completely, but I say please don't boycott Newsweek — it's still one of the very last places left where we can find news. Boycott the red carpet instead. You're going to win the Emmy, Ryan, and you're going to get the whole publicity bump that comes with it. You and your cast should proudly walk past every microphone that's shoved in your faces. The people holding the microphones are writing the "A" story and you don't have script approval. Boycott In Touch and Us Weekly and Brangelina Daily and every other piece of crap that makes us feel like we're all sitting under hairdryers.)

Gay actors are in absolutely no danger of losing parts in Broadway shows, so if it were me, I'd re-direct my anger to the real problem. The honest-to-God, no kidding around, small-minded, mean-spirited, hysterically frightened, pig-ignorant bigots who don't think homosexuals are fit to get married, adopt children or fight and die for their country. The ones who hold signs saying "God Hates Fags." Those people aren't in the backwoods of Idaho, they're in Congress. Fight THEM. I'll help.

And you know who else will help? Ramin Setoodeh. I promise you he's on the side of the good guys.

Of course, Sorkin brings up some interesting points, because he's an intelligent dude, but we're not buying it!

The fact of the matter is, REGARDLESS of society's obsession with celebrity culture, Setoodeh thinks that gay men are incapable of portraying straight men the way straight men are capable of playing gay…that, in itself, is a homophobic and offensive generalization!


[Image via WENN.]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

This Week In Celebrity Twitpics & Instagrams!
Epic Side-Eye Hall Of Fame!
Golden Globes 2018: ALL The Red Carpet Pics!
How Celebs Spent NYE 2K18!
Trump's 10 Worst Tweets Of 2017!
17 Outrageous Celebrity Holiday Gifts!

92 comments to “Aaron Sorkin Comes To The Defense Of Homophobic Newsweek Article!”

  1. 1

    Stop filling up your website with this gay crap - geez

  2. 2

    I don't think he's defending Setoodeh at all. He's saying he's completely wrong, but the real enemy isn't a guy writing a magazine article - he's pointing out that the people in charge of legislation are the homophobes we should be concerned with. They're the ones that actually affect the lives of gay men and women in the US.
    He's right.
    Once again, Perez('s ghost writer) didn't read the entire article.

  3. 3

    Re: VballGirl2010 – seriously. is this gaycentral.com? yawn.

  4. 4

    Of COURSE Sorkin would defend and say that the article isn't homophobic. He works in one of the most homophobic industries in the country. hey Sorkin, why not go back to working on Studeo 60…ohhhh, thats right, cancelled.

  5. 5

    Ok, so he makes a few good points, but Newsweek has really went down the crapper lately. It is a shell of a magazine compared to what it once was. I tend to agree that we should be making more of an effort on our legislators against the anti-gay people, but, I think that article was bull.

  6. 6

    Running your mouth isnt going to make people see what isnt there FatBoy , Leave it alone. You are a hedrophobic

  7. 7

    you cant be serious perez… you dont think this guy is right?? really?? just because someone doesnt have the exact same opinion as you?? that guy is well spoken and did an amazing job of trying to smooth everything over.. but i guess that is the exact opposite of what you do.. since you only like to stir up controversy and make peoples lives harder.. like outing them before they are ready….

  8. 8


  9. 9

    My thought is that you should re-read the article because YOU choose to ignore his advice and still be pissy about a magazine article. GET OVER IT and do something worthwhile about the problems behind it, Perez.

  10. 10

    i hate to say it..i just dont want to watch some gay actor pretending to like women in a role…it is too distracting….but yes i think gay roles should go to gay actors…it is like saying women can play male roles…a gay guy is gay….it is dumb to watch him try to be straight…now of course we know we have seen it years past …but we didnt know they were gay…so aaron is right..we just need to know less about celebs.

  11. 11

    Naturally "Perez" didn't read half the article (he can't read) (or write) (or spell) (or think). He would have noticed that Sorkin was talking about HIM ("every other piece of crap that makes us feel like we're all sitting under hairdryers")

  12. 12

    you cannot call a gay man homophobic. and if you do, in theory, that would mean they find man/woman couples wrong.

    i very much agree, you will never fully appriciate an actors ability hen you know about their personal life. you feed into this with this website

  13. 13

    really aaron?!?!? really??? i hope cheno NEVER dates you AGAIN!!! ass.

  14. 14

    Wow- long.
    I get it… question is why did Newsweek print this at all? i think his best point is… if you read tabs- like, let's face it, we on here do or we wouldn't be here- then duke it out in the tabs… this ain't newsworthy and it ain't Newsweek worthy. Trivial and inside baseball …. kinda like Star, or US, or dare I say Perez! Sorry PH- ya know i love u…

  15. 15

    I understand your anger with the NewsWeek article, as well as Sorkin's eloquent response, but I think you may be looking at this the same way Chenoweth is. Sorkin said she made valid points regarding gay men being able to play straight men and so on…but she missed the point because of course they can. I think Sorkin is trying to say that Setoodeh went to the play instantly presuming it would not go well because the lead actor is gay whilst his character is straight….And that this is a mute point because the actor's real life should have NOTHING to do with the charcter he is playing.
    I think he is just trying to say, in a very convoluted way (with all his extra, pretty words) that you shouldn't care what Setoodeh says because he obviously is missing the entire point of critiquing a play by evaluating the actors' real lives instead.
    P.S - He ruins it all by saying Setoodeh's on the "good guys' side…" We have no proof of that and so far all he's done is continue an endless cycle of ignorant thinking…but if you take that out, I think Sorkin could prove a valid point.

  16. 16

    i think you didn't really read sorkin's piece
    or if you did, you need to work on some reading comprehension
    and then follow up with critical thinking and rhetoric
    that is how adults do things, perez

  17. 17

    It can't be homophobic if he applies the same logic to straight people playing gay people. It's just an opinion about the boundaries of acting capabilities.

  18. 18

    I agree with Sorkin where he says we know too much about the actors personally. I don't like watching a man/woman romance when I know either of the leading actors is gay, male or female. It prevents me from getting into or believing the part, the acting or the story, knowing that the person in real life has sex with the same sex person. That's all.

  19. 19

    Sorkin is right! People can't play gay or straight. You can either play effeminate or masculine. I personally think, a true actor can play whatever. No matter how effeminate he may be. As an actor you have the responsibility to take speech classes to deepen your voice, and etiquette classes to lose the effeminate characteristics. That is a true actor.

  20. Celt says – reply to this


    He makes great points and is absolutely right. Perez thrives on the "A" story.

  21. 21

    Brilliant response. He's right, Setoodeh's take on this means he doesn't understand what it means to be an actor. And he's right about the real problem. And, Perez, just as what you write is covered by the First Amendment, so is what Setoodeh wrote.

  22. 22

    And, I assume you don't like what he wrote because he calls out your kind of "reporting" as part of the problem today.

  23. 23

    i'm appalled at how tiny-minded a lot of homosexuals have become.
    take the opportunity to open a dialogue about WHY gay actors aren't as popularized as much as straight ones, or why they aren't cast in leading roles as often. it's a lot more effective than whining and moaning about something that was clearly misunderstood.

  24. 24

    So are they saying that people who play serial killers can't possibly play it correctly because in real life they are not serial killers? Is this not the same concept?

  25. 25

    and the only reason perez doesnt agree is because he's the enemy of whom sorkin speaks.

  26. 26

    perez needs to stop overly senstitive about those insensitive people.

  27. 27


  28. 28

    I think he's saying that we know too much about celebrities these days. We know Sean Hayes is gay, so it's hard to separate the actor from the character he's playing. He's basically slamming you and all the other gossip mags and sites for outing people and obsessing about celebrities. It's gotten to the point that high-profile actors on these sites and mags cannot separate themselves from the characters they play. They've become characters themselves.

  29. 29

    I think you don't like what he's saying because it would put this whole website in danger of disapearing. You talk so much crap about people on here. I admit I come on and read it but you add these little side notes and put people down after reporting a story. It not only makes the celebrity look bad but it also makes you evil.

  30. 30

    This was a great article! I agree with what Mr. Sorkin is saying. One of my favorite movie actors of all time is Cary Grant, who was gay but kept it well hidden as it would of killed his career. Movie goers will not support a leading man who is gay if he is playing a straight man. I don't think it is homophobic to acknowledge truths, harsh as they may seem. Mr. Sorkin is right, fight injustice to gays regarding marriage, children and even property rights after death etc. I understand that it would be nice for young people to look up to a successful öut movie star, but at what expense to the actor's career? I also agree wholeheartedly about knowing too much about the actor and how that affects your view of their performance. Jennfier Aniston is a great example of that, maybe she is not always looking for some guy, but thats what you think when you see her in a role. I understand your feelings Perez, but sometimes you push your own agenda too much.

  31. 31

    Setoodeh was wrong. Sorkin said as much. That is not what is in question here. Sorkin IS right that we know (and want to know) so much about celebrities to the extent that it is virtually impossible to suspend disbelief sometimes to "buy" the character that they're playing if it goes too far against real life. I happen to agree 100%.

  32. 32

    I have to say, I agree with most of what was written. That would be the difference between the Rock Hudsons and the Sean Hayes of stage and screen. There are no secrets anymore. Actors can no longer leave their audience "wanting more". They already know too much!

  33. 33

    First, HOT DAMN, Sorkin is a good writer. I could read his rant all day long. Love this kind of intelligent dialogue. And, Perez, read the darn article. He doesn't defend anyone, he redirects the debate to a more enlightened core issue. And, the only ones he throws under the bus to do it are the hateful bigots whom really are homophobic. LOVE IT. Bravo, Aaron. Brilliant.

  34. 34

    I'm not reading all that fucking shit douchebag. Your campaigns have become boring.

  35. 35

    All you post about any more is homosexual controversy, or celebrities who defend gay rights! Okay, we get it…you're gay…you like gay people, and you prefer those who defend the gays! I think we've all had enough of the LTGB drama. If you feel slighted about the way society views you, go talk to the woman who make 60 cent on the dollar for doing the same job as her male counterpart. Or perhaps talk to the African American welfare mother who can't find work because of her skin color and 'socioeconomic situation'…maybe you should go talk to a victim of slavery or a WWII Vet. You have it so good, you have no idea…

  36. 36

    Re: sillytart – What does that even mean haha nice try

  37. 37


  38. 38

    This article by Sorkin was well written and makes many valid points. It is not at all defending Setoodeh, but merely suggesting an alternative to punishing the entire publication of Newsweek. He hit it right on the head: 10 years ago no one would have given a shit if a stage actor was "acting straight" or "acting gay." Our society is 100% OBSESSED with celebrity gossip more than ever before. I personally consider it a vice, a disease that we are all sick with.

  39. 39

    Even though dialogue is good, I can't believe we are talking about this. So he posted a "bad" review with poorly thought out comments…I was in Times Square on the night I saw this play(great by the way) when it almost blew up. I am a gay man, his comments were stupid but there are far more important things going on, even considering gay rights, this is a stupid conversation. Entertainment is important, arts are important, but when a country is in as damgerous a position as ever, Sean Hayes is a phenominal actor who could play any role. Something tells me even though he was the subject here even he wishes this would go away.

  40. 40

    Hes gay - he's not homophobic - just stating his opinion - geez, touchy touchy.

  41. 41

    Perez, you are just TRYING to stay mad, and fan the "flames", *couldn't resist* Get over it.

  42. 42

    YOU missed the point, exactly how he said everyone else did. The idea of "playing gay" or "playing straight" is the problem - the fact that a slight difference in femininity or masculinity defines a sexuality is the problem.

  43. 43

    I fell asleep reading this

  44. rsvp says – reply to this


    The big question here is what is gay? If an actor says he's gay, what are we expecting from that declaration? Will you be looking for stereotypical mannerism and behavior in his performance? This all just shows there's a long way to go about the general perception of what it means to be gay because there really isn't one definition, however much the media tries to imply that there is. If a macho actor comes out, what will be expected of him and what will you be trying to "detect" in his performance?

  45. chewi says – reply to this


    #1 - yes, this has become Gaycentral.com. It's becoming more and more redundant.
    #2 - If actors don't want to put themselves in these positions of people questioning their acting abilities based on gayness or straightness, they shouldn't reveal their sexual preference because YES, people are going to automatically be pre-disposed to what the actor's actual preference really is, and YES, it's going to influence our perception. Human beings are logical in that way. It's like saying 2+2=5. We all know that's not true, and we all know that no matter how hard someone tries to convince us, the fact is that 2+2 does not = 5. Period. Sean Hayes didn't come out of the closet for years…everyone kind of speculated his preference, but he didn't come out for this very reason. Now that he has, he's seeing the very consequences he predicted.

  46. 46

    Sorkin is right. We know too much about the private lives of actresses and actresses to the point we can't suspend disbelief when we watch them work. That's thanks to sites like yours and rags on the newsstand. You're part of the problem.

  47. 47

    who gives a crap!!! talk about celebrity gossip and not your own preferences about your gay ass. Now you know why so many people hate you gays!

  48. 48

    Come on guys, he makes a living off the obsession with celebrity culture and ridiculous gossip. He himself is pretty much a caricature of the obsession with fame and celebrity. You don't actually expect him to admit that Sorkin's got a good point?

  49. 49

    I completely understand where both Sorkin and Setoodeh are coming from. Now that we're obsessed with knowing every detail of celebrity’s private lives it's distracting to watch ANY celebrity without relating their character to their personal life, let alone watching a gay man in a romance movie with a woman, it's just not as believable when you know the truth. So you Perez, in reality are adding to the problem of why “gay men can’t act straight”.

  50. 50

    If nothing else, the article has forced people to come out and speak their minds and to think about the issue.

  51. 51


    Sorry to disagree with you (again), but who the fuck cares. Tempest in a teapot. And Sorkin is right.

  52. Coqi says – reply to this


    Celebrity gossip? No

  53. 53

    Re: VballGirl2010Re: sillytartRe: chewiRe: Coqi – Don't like the content of this website? Don't come back. Buh-bye.

  54. Coqi says – reply to this


    Re: perezhateswomen – I love you

  55. 55

    For so long, people who are uncomfortable with their own sexuality and filled with fear have wanted to limit the space that GLBT people can take up. Now some want to limit a GLBTperson's acting and artistic space. For those who try to limit, I say, come out of the tunnel (vision), it's bright and sunny outside with plenty of room for everyone. If you want to stay in the tunnel, that's your choice. In the final analysis, I say let the Setoodeh article be a reminder that every human being decides their own abundance.

  56. 56

    Sorkin is better written the Setoodeh. Little to object to hear.
    The major problem with Setoodeh's article was not his 'review' of Hayes performance. Its problem was the sweeping, short-sighted generalizations he used to amplify and support his opinion. In the objective world of art and opinion to say things like 'never' this or 'all' that sets you up for disagreement and error.

  57. 57

    Who Cares? One man wrote an article giving his opinion. If you don't agree, then you don't agree. Life goes on.

  58. 58

    Agree with Sorkin..but in what way did he defend this Setoodeh guy…by saying the guy is not homophobic but just very short sighted or something…how can this dude be anti gay when he´s gay himself? I mean, he has no self hatred disorder has he? This Setoodeh guy is just dum…like no intelligence….a lot of unnessecary words for a statement that Sorkin made but still right….

  59. 59

    The reason the article was printed is so freaking transparent: TO GET PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT A MAGAZINE that's dying. Duh. And everyone got played like a (gay or straight?) fiddle.

  60. 60

    There were plenty of men, back in the day, who played straight men in movies and did it very convincingly. Many of them had careers that gave them a comfortable living if not actually being a rich movie star. The most famous I can think of was Rock Hudson. If they tended to be effeminate in real life, they were good enough actors to change that for their roles. They had to if they wanted to work back then.

  61. @v@ says – reply to this


    The over reaction reminded me of a kind of gay fatwah rather than an eruption of intelligent discourse to counter Setoodah's piece. That won't win hearts and minds. Fair and just commentary that demolishes the premise of the piece will.

  62. 62

    Seriously, Perez- PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU'RE READING. I thought Aaron Sorkin made an excellent care; which, unfortunately, you've chosen to skim over because you're so eager to get your panties in a bunch over gay rights. Those rights are incredibly important, I agree: but don't let that rush for sensationalism & controversy let you ignore or miscontrue something that's actually intelligent and logical.

  63. 63

    This man is 100% correct and the reason Perez still doesn't buy it is that Aaron Sorkin just laid the smack down on the Perez Hilton's of the world. Awesome work Mr. Sorkin!

  64. 64



  65. 65

    Sorkin was talking about YOU Perez Hilton!!!!

  66. Comet says – reply to this


    Look, I don't mean to be insensitive, but you know what? There is an oil spill in the Gulf that's being termed the worst environmental disaster in history. Pakistani terrorists are trying to kill us. Our economy is still in the toilet. Who cares what one person's opinion is about whether gay actors should portray straight people? All of this is just a distraction from the bigger, scarier problems in the world. Can't we just disagree with him and move on to more pressing issues? Just sayin.'

  67. 67

    Four days after it went online you're posting this?

  68. 68

    Re: nyalan
    i hate to say it..i just dont want to watch some gay actor pretending to like women in a role…it is too distracting….but yes i think gay roles should go to gay actors…it is like saying women can play male roles…a gay guy is gay….it is dumb to watch him try to be straight…now of course we know we have seen it years past …but we didnt know they were gay…so aaron is right..we just need to know less about celebs.

  69. 69

    Re: KrazyK02 – I think he's saying that if you already know the guy is a serial killer and he's playing a serial killer, you'll be wondering why he isn't in jail and it ruins the whole story.

  70. 70

    I agree with him. He made some very valid points that can't be argued profussly with.
    But it's so long, gosh!

  71. 71

    Wut. Did he just out Mr Setoodeh? He said that he is gay as well. So Perez, is he now homophobic? Self-loathing?


  72. 72

    He didn't defend Setoodeh, for one, and two (not that I really care but) I don't think an openly gay man can be homophobic. That doesn't make sense.

  73. 73

    You could have simply not given space to Sorkin's article and no one here would have missed it. But you did and it is a harsh indictment not only of paper tabloids, but of YOU and your ilk; which is why you had to "not buy it". If you did, you'd be agreeing with a person who basically thinks YOU are a major part of the decay of our society. Note I did not say civilization, but society. Big difference. But I doubt someone with your intellect has a single clue what I am talking about.

  74. 74

    He is a critic so he said it. But a lot of people probalby think it. I don't, but it's because I don't think that much into it, but if he says it, and people think it??? He is giving an opinion and it is not a negative thought it is an observatgion based on his experience no?

  75. 75


  76. 76

    Shut Up, Perez!! It's like you didn't read the article… it flew right over your fat head. o_O

  77. 77

    "The fact of the matter is, REGARDLESS of society's obsession with celebrity culture, Setoodeh thinks that gay men are incapable of portraying straight men the way straight men are capable of playing gay…that, in itself, is a homophobic and offensive generalization!"

    of course you write that… you're just like the paparazzi or US weekly chasing the A story… you don't care to change your opinion on this or anything else as long as your opinion is the most controversial and gets your website more hits… people like you blow this kind of stuff up to more than it actually is… you know that your "opinion" and your "beliefs" are based on what's popular at the time and nothing else…

  78. 78

    What the fuck ever, Perez!!! The author of the Newsweek article is gay, right? So, how is his saying what he said more homophobic than when you called Will.i.am a fucking f@gg0t? Seriously?! I don't see that Aaron is coming to the author's defense, I see that he is saying basically that the article was poorly written and that actors/actresses have a hard time playing the characters, not because they can't but because society knows so much about their personal life that they have a hard time accepting the fact that as an actor, they should be able to play any character regardless of their personal life. Your bullshit about everything gay is getting so old and tired. I don't even think you read this whole letter from sorkin, and if you did, you truly didn't understand it. Take your fucking blinders off, open your fucking mind and quit reading into everything that pertains to homosexuals whether good or bad is homophobic. Seriously, you are a very sad, unhappy, angry person.

  79. 79

    Perez does nothing for the gay community. Every time he wants to make an issue of what he finds offensive to the gay community he turns it into a dead horse. I am not homophobic and wish equality for all but as far as I’m concerned, when any group takes issue incessantly, the rest of society starts to write them off as a bunch of whiners and is more reluctant to support their cause, especially when the discussion becomes disrespectful. I also want to mention that I don’t know why he promotes this site as a celebrity gossip site when clearly it is becoming a gay rights site of a sort, which is fine but not advertised correctly.

  80. 80

    I like Aaron's article much better than Ryan Murphy's article. Aaron includes wit and humor and makes thoughtful and nuanced points, while Ryan's article is completely humorless and more about self-flattery and self-importance. Yeah so Glee includes everyone. And your point is….

  81. 81

    It's not homophobic. I completely agree with Sorkin, and I don't at all agree with Setoodeh. You and whoever else writes this couldn't match Sorkin with intelligence, understanding, or compassion. Anyway, Sorkin is saying that YOU and your website are a part of the problem. Didn't you get that?

  82. 82

    Re: downwithmuffins – u have the words that i could've said..bravo!!! at first i hesitate to read the whole stuff but im glad i did. yes, he is well spoken and he knows whats going on.

  83. 83

    Of course you wouldnt like his response Perez! It goes against your lifestyle and everything your about! He's saying that people like you dive into celebrities personal lives instead of watching their careers! I am all for gay rights, but let's be honest here…not all gay actors can play straight characters and not all straight actors can play gay characters! So maybe you should stop bashing and try to educate…isnt that what the gay community wants after all?

  84. 84

    Of course perez doesn't agree… the guy pointed his finger at websites exactly such as this one!!!
    tabloids and gossip are whom he is putting at fault. and it is partly true.

    I personally would have to agree with others, i don't like seeing a gay male portraying a heterosexual and pretending to like women when i know he doesn't…it just doesn't work for me. Just as I dont like seeing straight people play gay.
    I don't like seeing men playing women, or women playing men….or older people playing roles that they are too old for….
    could you imagine if meryl streep wanted to play harry potter? just because she is an amazing actress doesn't mean she should get the role, i am sure she would do a great job, but is that really the best casting decision??

    I don't think so.

    you don't cast lindsay lohan in a jane austen film, because it is not believable.

    just because someone is willing to speak their mind it seems to be cause to publicly ridicule them and harass them…i guess freedom of speech and freedom of the press is a lost thing in the usa.
    or at least only when your views go against a particular group who has a loud enough voice to make you look politically incorrect or intolerant.

    I just don't see what threat this man poses to gays, he is gay himself. he was not promoting hate, or inciting violence… so what is the big deal?
    but you all sure have given him a lot of publicity and attention, haven't you :)

  85. 85

    hah. he just told us to stop reading stuff like your site. no wonder you don't agree with him.

  86. 86

    come on lil gurl, you need to rename the title of this entry… perez you know better than that. for shame

    but this has to be one of the best articles i've read in a while. makes me feel guilty for actually visiting celeb blogs sites (like this one of course). i completely agree with mr. sorkin. actors/actresses should be judged on their performance and not their personal habits

    it really depends on what the audience wants though. i pay to go see a movie. someone else pays for a subscription to people magazine. it all depends on what you find 'entertaining'

  87. 87

    Re: downwithmuffins – for real. He prob didn't even read the whole article. Or if he did, he just didn't comprehend it correctly…

  88. 88


  89. 89

    Sorkin is right..!

    If we keep crying 'homophobic' at EVERYTHING that isn't necessarily homophobic…the term will stop having meaning.

    This article is NOT homophobic. It was just WRONG.

  90. 90

  91. 91

    First of all, the authors comments are NOT homophobic. Homophobic suggests he has "fear of" Homosexuals. However, all he did was state his OPINION. Since when does stating your opinion make you someone who fears homosexuality? And it's his opinion on acting for God's sake. ACTING!

    More importantly, how is it that the authors opinion has less value than yours Perez? Your opinions which tear others down, bash what they wear, what they say and what they do is acceptable whereas the authors opinion is not?!?! And the only reason it is not is because it differs with YOUR opinion. We have a word for that in both the straight and gay community, it's called HYPOCRITE.

  92. 92

    This will most likely be ignored since this is probably old news, but as my screen-name states, IGNORANT PEREZ. I am appalled that the Gay and Lesbian community does not sue your ass for claiming you are guy and force you to stop claiming same. Did you even read this article you fool. The man is 100% right as can be seen by your HIGHLIGHTING the areas that you want the public read. YOU CANNOT PLAY A GAY OR STRAIGHT CHARACTER. What a Goddamn fucked up fool you are.