fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4473 ]

[ SECRET POST #4473 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4473 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

[Note from OP: All images obtained without creepy family stalking: James & Sullivan Marsters' from a promo shot for their band, Jensen & JJ Ackles' from Jensen's public Instagram]

__________________________________________________

14.

[Queer Eye]

__________________________________________________

15. https://i.imgur.com/EcOtWAA.gif
[animated secret, Avengers]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #640.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I think the idea is that he may have been bi and never told anyone publicly, while being good friends with a gay man that was also on the show, and made the gay man never allude to his sexuality because that was controversial and keeping the peace and harmony was prioritized over showing or normalizing those issues

Did I get everything? I'm not caught up to The Discourse

Exactly.

There's also the whole element of identity discourse around assigning people identities that they didn't necessarily claim for themselves. (but honestly I didn't really see that much Discourse around the Mr Rogers stuff from any angle)

Yeah, though if Mr Rogers did tell Clemmons not to let anyone know he was gay and be straight in public, he was assigning roles in a sense as well.

In 1968, Fred Rogers told Clemmons that while his sexuality did not matter to him personally, Clemmons could not be "out" and continue appearing on Mister Rogers' Neighborhood, because of the scandal that would arise.[12][13] In the late 1960s, Rogers and others suggested that Clemmons get married as a way to deal with his sexual orientation, which he did.[14] His marriage to wife Carol did not work out, and Clemmons divorced in 1974 so that he could live openly as a gay man.[5][12] Rogers remained personally supportive of Clemmons, but required him to avoid any indication of his homosexuality – such as the earring he began to wear as a signifier – on the program.[12]

Personally I'm not enraged about it or anything, I understand where his priorities might have lay, but it is disappointing.

Sure, but....Rogers was a *very* Xian man, and the sixties/seventies children's programming wasn't like it is now, with more topics of this kind being dealt with. He already touched on stuff no other program would dare do, so....

I just cant' hold him to my own, personal standard. And I still think he is probably one of the best humans to ever live in the 20th century.

NAYRT - I agree. I mean, yes it's always kind of a bummer to learn that your wonderful paternal idol (or whatever other kind of idol) did in fact have feet of clay. And in some cases, what you learn about someone is really shitty and you can't really forgive them for it. But for me, this just isn't one of those cases.

I do feel terrible for Clemmons, though, and definitely want the injustice he faced to be my biggest takeaway from this whole thing.

(no subject)

tabaqui - 2019-04-06 01:22 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2019-04-06 02:10 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

tabaqui - 2019-04-06 04:00 (UTC) - Expand

It's wild to think how much public opinion has shift on gayness. While it's good that the younger generation doesn't deal with as much homophobia, I think they don't get how bad it was.

Yup. I think it's mostly that people really wanted to think of Fred Rogers as a voice of change and acceptance. Rather than one of don't ask don't tell. Which was radical in its own day, but hasn't stood up over time either.

True.

Let's be honest here. In the 60s and 70s the degree to which film and broadcasting were willing to cover for gay men was directly proportional to how much money they earned for the business. Cole Porter had an entire movie covering for him. For someone like Clemmons in Public Television, which had just won an ugly fight in congress for the right to even exist?

oh I know, right? the strides are miraculous and worth celebrating. but on the flip side, them younguns need to know their history and know that how we view things now is not how we always viewed things.

They really, really don't. They cannot even fathom what it would've been like for a *presbyterian minister* to be openly queer, and be on tv. People would've burned him in effigy. Elton John came out as bi in Playboy in 1976 - NO ONE DID THIS. I could list all the things that happened to him as a result, but the point is, coming out was not a thing then unless you wanted to be hounded by people, fear for your life, and possibly under investigation by the police.

I think people often have good intentions but Tumblr is a) largely a circlejerk and b) a very limited perspective on anything that has historical context.

One branch of the Presbyterian church approved ordination of LGBTQ people at the local level in 2011.

People born into a world where Modern Family, the Real O'Neal's, The Fosters, The Legend of Korra, and gay Doctor Who characters exist don't really have the experience of gay themes being considered inappropriate for children. In the late 90s, there were openly gay characters and actors but all on shows aimed at adults/older teens. Because no matter how accepting people were becoming of gayness, it was still seen as an adult topic.

A children's show wouldn't touch the concept even that "recently".

This. I personally know a bunch of gay people from that era who got married to someone of the opposite sex because they literally could NOT be out if they wanted to keep their jobs, not be ostracized, etc. It was really, really bad back then, and I don't think people from this generation understand that.

They really don't. I grew up bi in the American south in the 70s-80s and you had to be very careful about who you told, it was perfectly legal to get kicked out of your apartment or rental house and fired from your job for being queer, ffs! Never mind oh, getting killed because of it. Holy shit some of these ignorant children need to crack a history book.

You know perfectly well that this isn't in the history books

You know perfectly well that AYRT wasn't talking about "the" history books they give you in school.

Yup. And then they're still perfectly able to pull out talk about how being gay is so terrifying for them because of rampant homophobia when it suits them, like when they want to bully other queer identities out of their community because "nobody has to live in fear of being killed for being asexual." They so want it both ways.

If someone is straight and asexual then they're not queer

ding dong you are wrong

If you're asexual, you're not straight. Straight people want to have sex with people of the opposite gender. Asexual people don't want to have sex with anyone. And if you think female presenting people aren't getting murdered for refusing to fuck dudes they don't wanna fuck then whooooo boi do I got news for you

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2019-04-06 18:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2019-04-07 00:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

osidiano - 2019-04-07 10:48 (UTC) - Expand

I'm too young to remember personally, but when my mum was at university in the mid-70s, she was already engaged to my dad, but he wasn't nearby, so she and another female friend in the same situation used to go out with a gay couple because it made it look like two heterosexual couples going out, and there would be less trouble. And that was in a fairly 'liberal' metropolitan area.

AYRT: Oh. Well... yeah, then I'm with OP, people need to consider history and why he would have remained closeted.

I'd like to add, lots of kids today are unaware (and adults with rose-tinted nostalgia glasses have forgotten) that at the time, Mr. Rogers wasn't the universally beloved icon he's seen as today. He was already hated by hardcore Christians and right-wingers for preaching love, nonviolence, and tolerance for everyone. I have a sense that current discoursers think he was so influential and loved that he should have come out because if he had he would have changed society's views on bi/homosexuality for the better. But looking at how he was actually viewed at the time, there is no way that's what would have happened.

Thank you for this excellent point! I was a kid when Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood was on TV, and there were homes where you couldn't watch it because the parents thought he was too radical and 'hippy dippy'.

+1

There was literally a post going around a few months ago (maybe during Black History month?) about what a big deal it was for him and Clemons to share a kiddie pool for their damn feet in protest of all the black pool segregation horseshit. He was picking his battles! It's ridiculous that kids can't understand and respect that (or remember what they reblogged in February)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only