Watching the Emmys, I noticed Jim Parsons during his acceptance speech (he was a surprise winner for Big Bang Theory) and thought, "I wonder if he's gay? Nobody's talking about it." Now, someone is.
National Enquirer (September 20, 2010) has outed Parsons, albeit in a rather nice way. The do it so cutely it's more of an "awww-ting" than an outing. On the same page as a nasty story about Bethenny Frankel cheating on her first husband, NE runs a piece on how Parsons and his partner of several years, Todd Spiewak, are allegedly going to get married.
It sure beats: "BIG BANG'S BIG SECRET LIFE!" or something similar. Cute couple!
Oh my, haha!! I thought the same exact thing, when I told my brother he won an award I told him "and also I think he is gay".
But still, good for him, i love hsi character.
Posted by: Bryce | September 08, 2010 at 03:29 PM
I'm sorry. Let me throw a wrench here. Did Parsons cooperate with this? If not, I'm against it. Outing is a savage tool of the younger generation and should only be used on people like that Republican operative who kept Bush in office by using us as a wedge issue. Please obey my Puritanism.
Posted by: Wilberforce | September 08, 2010 at 03:57 PM
Wilberforce: No, he definitely didn't cooperate. This is a well-worn topic around these parts, but my take is that "outing" is just reporting facts and in no way invasive. I just don't buy that someone being gay is a private fact, any more than someone being a woman or a man or a blonde or a brunette. Does being openly gay have a stigma in Hollywood? That's a different topic. But the press should be reporting this stuff just as often as they report on famous straight couples because it's fair, true and representative. (And because there is an interest.)
Posted by: Matthew Rettenmund | September 08, 2010 at 04:30 PM
You are the best Matt !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Robert | September 08, 2010 at 06:30 PM
I wondered when his sexuality was going to become a topic of conversation out there. I've always thought it was fairly obvious, but I guess it took the Emmy win for the tabs to care. If the story's accurate, here's wishing the happy couple very well!
Posted by: Jay | September 08, 2010 at 07:32 PM
You got it Matthew. Jim Parsons goes EVERYWHERE with Todd. He made a point of thanking him in his acceptance speech.
He's also a comic genius.
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | September 08, 2010 at 10:53 PM
By being against "outing" arent you just giving power to the meme that homosexuality is wrong and a dark secret to be hidden. I agree with Matt R., its the truth so why is it wrong to state a fact. The queezyness about outing is so outdated and goes back to when everyone was closeted and their was code that you didnt say on monday who you saw at the gay bars on saturday. Sorry boomers. Its not 1965 anymore. Being closeted is just wrong.
Posted by: Bob | September 09, 2010 at 04:24 PM
Jim Parsons is a comic genious...his TIMING impecable...he (Sheldon and leonard) make a great Comic team...as actually the WHOLE cast..LOVE the SHOW!
Posted by: rextrek | September 09, 2010 at 04:37 PM
Here is a man marrying his partner - how is he "in?" He is only getting publicity because he won an award and is now (more) famous. I never heard of him until the Emmys.
He is not being outed - just getting famous.
Posted by: Mark | September 09, 2010 at 04:55 PM
mark said: "He is only getting publicity because he won an award and is now (more) famous. I never heard of him until the Emmys."
and i only watch pbs. heck i only watch one network show and i know who he is!
i always though he was gay.
Posted by: ricky | September 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM
Outing is vicious and cruel in the majority of cases. If the world were fair- maybe it wouldn't matter- on the other hand if the world were fair- there wouldn't be much reason to be in the closet. As it is 'Outing' someone can have a detrimental effect on both their professional and personal lives. And if as some people say- it's no Big Deal- well then in that case, there is no need to report on it at all.
Rex
Posted by: Rex Smith | January 18, 2012 at 03:25 PM
Rex: If we decided people's gayness should always be ignored by the media, then why are no other aspects of their personalities ignored? Including aspects that would have detrimental effects on their lives and careers? Where is the line drawn?
Also, if it's considered a negative to be gay by a large % of the audience, doesn't respecting that opinion FEED it? Visibility has been shown to work wonders on improving opinions of gay people. Look at marriage equality—it was a fantasy 20 years ago or even 10 and now that it's discussed more and more, it's becoming more and more accepted.
If a gay public figure wants to be quiet about it, that is his or her right. But he or she has NO right to expect the media to lie for them or to ignore that aspect of their lives while being spoonfed fake or real personal stories.
Posted by: Matthew Rettenmund | January 18, 2012 at 06:11 PM