![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Adam/OUT controversy. I'm not going to rehash it all here, but I'm sure you can find anything you want to know by utilizing your Google-fu
1. Adam's publicist's word choice was, well, bad. Out of context, anyway. Did you know that he's gay? Well he is. And whether or not you choose to believe it, that does make a difference. I am less offended when a woman uses the word cunt than I would be if a man did. I've heard the same is true with black people and the N-word. I see no reason why that wouldn't be the case when using words like "too gay" or "gay gay". I'm just saying, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE. And in light of that, I'm even more pissed at Hicklin for willfully omitting that fact. I'd be much more offended if I thought it was a straight guy saying that than I am about another gay dude saying it, and I believe that was his intention. Douche
2. Adam is gay and in a very high profile position. Some have implied or outright said that this gives him some sort of responsibility to the "gay community." First of all, there's no such thing. Second of all, I call bullshit. Adam's only responsibility is to Adam. Other people can consider him a gay poster child. Other people can call him a "pioneer." He ain't gotta do a damn thing. He'll be those things whether he acknowledges them or not, and I don't see why his acknowledgement is necessary. All he wants to do is make music, and by doing so: by becoming successful, by not making his sexuality a ~thing, he's doing more for the cause than a hundred marches, or a thousand strongly worded letters. He's leading by example: if he doesn't make a big deal about it, then maybe fewer and fewer people will make a big deal about it. Isn't that the end game? Isn't that the goal? To have it not be a big deal? Because that's what I always thought.
3. Hicklin has dug himself a hole so deep I don't know how he'll ever get out, and I hope he rots there. I also don't know how anyone can still be defending him. I guess most of them are just too proud to eat crow. Hicklin doesn't give a damn about anything but keeping his rag in business. Why else would he wait months to air the dirty laundry? The photoshoot where the first batch of "too gay" warnings were given was back in August. The second (before the interview) at the beginning of October. Why wait 3-4 or even 1 month? Why not make the blast as soon as the shoot/interview was done? Better yet, why agree to the terms in the first place if you find it so disgusting? Two words: Optimal Visibility. He wanted optimal visibility for his magazine, and what better issue than OUT 100? What better issue than the one in which Adam Lambert actually appears? What better time than on the eve of the release of Adam's debut album? By accounts, OUT's about to go under, so of course he wants to sell as many issues as possible. Details and Rolling Stones have proved that Adam sells, and everyone knows controversy sells. Piece o' cake. DOUCHENOZZLE. And if you had any doubts, check out the picture he tweeted to go along with his latest show of assholery. The photograph depicts a stack of the OUT 100 issue next to a stack of the Details issue with Adam on the cover. The OUT 100 stack is noticeably smaller, I assume to illustrate that OUT is selling better. I don't think I'm reading too much into it to say that the photo has a distinctly gloating quality; after all, a picture is worth a thousand words. And it's proof positive that Hicklin doesn't give a damn about Adam or Adam's management. All he cares about is the bottom line.
Alright, now, I am so over this. BACK TO HAVING PALPITATIONS IN ANTICIPATION FOR THE AMA PERFORMANCE. IT'S GONNA BE A DOOZY.
shocked
crazy
annoyed
chipper
discontent
content
anxious
sad