Are the Oscars keeping gay actors closeted?

"First, I would like to thank the Academy for showing that it can be about the performance and not the politics." - Mo'Nique after winning her Best Supporting Actress award for "Precious" in 2010.

Last sunday was the 86th Oscars. An award that a million people would kill to have.

The big problem with the Oscars is its politics. In its early years, the Academy would think twice before handing over an award to a black actor/actress, no matter how great their performance were.

It seems that nowdays they gave up this prejudice. We've seen Whoopi Goldberg, Denzel Washington, Halle Berry, Morgan Freeman, Jamie Foxx, Jennifer Hudson, Forest Whitaker, Mo'Nique, Octavia Spencer and this year, Lupita Nyong'o, each of them going up the Oscar's stage receive their statuette for what ultimately matters: their talent.

Will this ever happen with a gay actor?

The living proof of the Academy's prejudice with the LGBT related it was when Crash won Best Picture over Brokeback Mountain. Meanwhile, the BAFTAs and the Golden Globes gave Brokeback their Best Picture awards. They didn't see any problem with that.

So what's the big deal, Academy?

They're completely okay with giving straight actors an award for playing gay characters, but are bizarrely reactionary when it comes to give a gay actor an award for doing a straight character.

Some straight actors who were awarded for a gay character:

- Tom Hanks for Philadelphia (1994)
- Charlize Theron for Monster (2004)
- Hilary Swank for Boys Don't Cry (2000)
- Sean Penn for Milk (2009)

Dustin Lance Black won Best Original Screenplay in 2009, but I'm talking about the acting awards, because those are the awards that the audience care the most.

I have no doubt some of the Academy voters are conservatives. But the Oscars are supposed to award you for your acting not for your sexuality. If you refuse to award somebody for their sexuality, there is no better word for that rather than discrimination. Because homosexuality does not interfere on somebody's competence to do a good work. It's the same thing than fire an employee for being gay.

But what would be the Academy's reason for doing so? My theory is, assuming that half of America is conservative, these people are part of their audience. So obviously stupid people would not watch the Oscars anymore if they see a homosexual winning an award. So this is it? They don't wanna lose the audience?

Even so, they shouldn't want these people as audience. They're discriminative, for wanting to decide what a person should have or not on their life based on sexuality. So why do they want to have this people watching them?

This doesn't happen just in the Oscars. Lots of directors and studios still don't want gay actors in their movies, playing a leading role. They simply think "eww this guy must take it up the a--, that's disgusting, I don't want somebody that does that on my movie". Well let me ask: does that affect your life? Does that interfere on the actors talent? His private life does not concern anybody rather than he himself.

Michael Douglas even said he knows a lot of closeted actors, who want to protect their careers. They do not want lose good roles and probably don't want lose Oscars.

I have no doubt there are closeted actors out there who wish to win an Academy one day. And their politics is what keeps those actors hiding themselves.

But I always wondered, will the Academy ever stop with this? This is so ridiculous, so discriminative, so disrespectful. Homosexuality doesn't interfere in somebody's talent, of course not. There is actually no harm on giving a gay actor an award, just like 50 years ago there was no harm on giving a black person an award too.

I hope one day a gay actor will be able to make Mo'Nique's words his words.

Do you agree with me? Do you also think that the Oscars have politics with gays?

(PS: is much easier a lesbian actress get an Oscar rather than a gay actor getting one, because like I said, people think lesbian sex is hot but gay sex is disgusting :dry

 

You don't need to talk like if what I said is directly affecting people's life, for crying out loud.

 

Yes but your problem is that you focused entirely on this part of the thread and ignored all the rest. I asked opinions about the Oscars' politics, not an advice about "making assumptions". What you said has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I asked. You could've said that, might as well say something about the thread, but no, you said ONLY your making assumptions stuff. Where's your opinion about the politics? This is what I wanted.

Compared to everything I wrote, the part that you focused the most is trivial. I said that based on a derogatory comment about gays made by Mel Gibson in 1991.

 

It may not be trivial for you, but compared to every single thing I wrote it is trivial. Being owner of the thread, I expected opinions about what I asked. Yes, you can pick out what stands out the most, but could you not be narrowed only to what standed out? This is what I said, you focused only, entirely on that part. So far you were the only one who answered the thread but you didn't talk about the politics, so I got nothing.

And I didn't mean to offend either.

 

No, no, they still nominate the films to keep up the appearances, to avoid criticism as Brokeback was lauded the greatest film of the year. Is not about conspiracy, is about prejudice. I'm not the only one who thinks so, look it up, there are so many other articles talking about the Oscars prejudice on giving awards to gays.

But it's okay I guess you're not into the Oscar stuff as I am. I know things for example, the influence of Harvey Weinstein on the award.

 

Let me ask you something, do you doubt that there are people who think twice before doing something for a gay person, like giving a job?

Here's an article: Why can't gay actors win Oscars? - National International LGBT Issues | Examiner.com

Okay you are into Oscar stuff. Talk about Harvey Weistein's influence on the Oscar season. Without googling it.

 

The Disney is a LGBT supporter but they are not gays themselves. This is what I was talking about, gay actors themselves winning major categories. Anne Hathaway also supports gays but she won regardless.

---------- Post added 4th Mar 2014 at 05:57 PM ----------

That was actually a good point. Hollywood only started actually accepting gays this time.

Ian McKellen had an incredible performance in 1999, he was nominated for the Best Actor award but lost it.

 

I meant deep, deep stuff. That was what I meant. You started with your whole making assumptions stuff like I was saying that you know nothing about the Oscars, I meant the deep stuff.

I never said that hollywood is "trying to cater to most of the Americans who are against homosexuality" I talked about the Oscar's prejudice on giving best actor and best actress awards to gays. Just like their prejudice with latin-american people, they didn't give brazilian actress Fernanda Montenegro an Oscar.

 

I'm making assumptions. So what? It's not directly affecting your social life.

 

Did people make speculations at the times of her wins? The years she won were 1989 and 1992.