Comments on: Adam Lambert on criticism from ‘Out’ editor: he crossed a line

By: skeptical

skeptical — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:38:39 +0000

i like adam’s responses. even my dysfunctional gaydar beeped off the wall when i saw him.. he sooo has not been hiding it.

but he’s got a good point. why should a gay person be defined primarily by orientation? that’s so limiting! straight people aren’t defined primarily by their orientation.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Emily

Emily — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:56:25 +0000

If all Adam asked was to not be asked political questions, then that’s fair enough. Why should a singer be expected to have a coherent opinion on politics? Could be that he doesn’t give a shit about politics, or knows next to nothing about it, and how entertaining would that interview be?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Whitey Fisk

Whitey Fisk — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:18:13 +0000

Wow- if you haven’t read the editor’s letter yet, read it.

http://out.com/detail.asp?id=26168

I cannot STAND Adam Lambert, but this is ridiculous. What is this editor complaining about for God’s sake? Lambert is an openly gay public figure on the cover of a gay magazine. How much more gayness does Hicklin need to be satisfied? Since when does this moron determine what level of gayness one needs to display in order to be appropriately gay? What an idiot.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: anon

anon — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:48:50 +0000

Forgive my bigotted point of view – but the dude’s wearing eye shadow! Case closed.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Rosanna

Rosanna — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:29:08 +0000

I just LOVE Adam!!!! Way to go! Being gay doesn’t mean having (or having to have) the same agenda that OUT has. Ain’t that simple????

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Spike

Spike — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:21:19 +0000

This is so funny. Glambert has gotten so much mileage out of this. One well-worded statement would have done it.

Love Roma’s comment; worthy of a spit take.

Adam — be who you are and just get on with it. The editor called him and his “team” on the fact that they were censoring the article. You chose to give them an interview. You know the audience. As Shakespeare would say — “the lady doth protest too much”.

I have had the experience of being totally misquoted in articles — nothing serious, small town rags. You wonder if the writer was in the same room as the content is not what you talked about at all. This doesn’t sound like that.

P.S. Stop recycling your interviews and we’re all over your going down on a woman. To be honest your whole shtick is just getting boring. I’m edgy/I’m wholesome/I can french kiss and grope girls. Move on, there’s nothing to see here.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Sumodo

Sumodo — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:48:38 +0000

New management for Glambert, STAT! They seem too timid for such a bold new star who breaks every mold. Nobody puts a muzzle on GaGa, nobody pigeon-holes her as gay or straight, so call her and find out if they can help Glambert get new representation. Also, Glambert needs thicker skin. It’s not going to get ANY EASIER.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Bobby the K

Bobby the K — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:36:13 +0000

“Adam doesn’t want to intentionally emphasize his gayness…”

That’s one of the most ridiculous statements i’ve read in a long time.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Karen

Karen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:22:24 +0000

Is it weird that I have no idea who this guy is? Also, what is up with the hair? It looks like a raccoon died on his head.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Roma

Roma — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:16:05 +0000

Yes bros! That was the most gay cover I have ever seen. The only thing that could have made it more gay was if he was kissing a unicorn.

Although I bet unicorns wouldn’t be gay enough for Out either.

Report this comment as spam or abuse