It’s called “acting”. I find it utterly mind-boggling that someone cannot separate actors from the roles that they play – it’s what I expect from Twilight kiddies who haven’t found their first pube yet.
well Kristen Stewart can’t act so thats probably why
Wow, Bret. Obsessing much?
The greater mystery is why anyone should want to turn that money-raking garbage into a film at all.
Idiot. Gay men play ‘straight’ all the time!
What part of the term “Actor” does he fail to understand? Would he have an issue with a lesbian actress playing the opposite lead role? I doubt it very much.
To reverse things a good straight actor can act a gay role very well too. Nothing ludicrous about that either.
It’s just that no-one EVER says ‘Oh he’s straight, he will simply not be convincing in a gay role.’
Hes a bit of dick really when you read thru his tweets. Its called acting for a reason the same way straight actors have been cast into gay roles and have still managed just as well.
A surprising number of people find it very easy nowadays (it wasn’t always the case) to cope with a straight actor playing a gay role but, when it comes to the reverse, find it impossible to separate the actor’s private life from his role. It’s really quite extraordinarily irritating.
Oddly enough, there’s a parallel: in the 1952 film of Show Boat the intention was to cast Lena Horne, a mixed-race actress, to play a mixed-race character who has a relationship with a white man; but instead they opted for Ava Gardner browned-up, since it was felt at the time that the US South could cope with the thought of an interracial relationship only if they knew the actress herself was white. Bizarre.
But a curiously similar situation with the gay/straight actors now.
Erm…most of the leading “hetrosexual” actors in Hollywood are gay anyway. What stupid comment to make. If an actor is good enough he should be able to play any role he casted for.
most of the leading “hetrosexual” actors in Hollywood are gay anyway
It’s amazing that anyone can believe such a statement, in this age of paparazzi and scant privacy, without a shred of evidence.
He thinks wearing make up automatically equals gay. He’s jumped on the obvious stereotype.
Incidentally, who IS HE????
don’t all actors wear makeup for filming and public events, because one imperfection and the tabloids kick up a fuss.
Brett Easton Ellis is a moron.
And he’s a deplorable closet case – he is gay or bi, but regularly trots out the lie that he is not into labels.
And he’s a homophobic bigot.
If Matt Bomer cannot play a straight character because he is gay, then why did Mr Ellis think that Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal or Sean Penn were capable of playing gay characters in Brokeback Mountain or Milk.
Brett Easton Ellis is an ignorant, homophobic closet-case and a very, VERY bad writer.
Absolutely right about that and he’ll deny he’s a homophobe because he has gay friends of course. A homophobic bigot is a homophobic bigot, even if Ellis is gay himself, some of the worst homophobes of all.
Hey! He’s a decent writer!
He talks like its some especially hard and important role to play too, but the books are absolute trash.
Which is why Brett Easton Ellis should be involved in these movies.
He is an absolute abortion of a writer – a truly dreadful hack.
I read some of his novels and was appalled a how trivial, irrelevant and unnecessary they were.
His books serve no purpose other than to destroy trees.
Bret Ellis is an idiot. Was openly straight actor Tom Hanks unsuitable to play the lead gay role and partner of Antonio Banderas’ character in “Philadelphia” unsuitable because he’s straight? Get a life, Ellis and quit the homophobia.
What about straight actor, William Hurt who played the effeminate gay character in “Kiss of the Spider Woman”? Again, Ellis is a moron and a homophobe no matter how much he may protest the charge.
They’re making a film out of an incredibly badly-written thinly-veiled Twilight fanfic which heavily promotes rape, sexual abuse and domestic violence, not to mention giving a completely inaccurate version of BDSM, and all people are worried about is whether a gay actor can seem straight in film? Check your priorities, people.
No you check your priorities.
A bisexual (or gay author) makes homophobic comments about a gay actor’s ability to play a role, and you expect people to accept it?
And as you are well aware ’50 Shades of Grey’ are books written by a female author, and have sold 99% of its volume to female readers so clearly the female audience of these books have problematic views regarding domestic violence etc?
But the popularity of the books is irrelevant – women just seem to like them.
Ellis’ homophobia on the other hand.
Of course I don’t accept it, it was a stupid and offensive comment, but I think it’s far less worrying than the fact that this is going to be a film based on a book which glorifies rape and abuse. As for “women just seem to like them”, a hell of a lot of women are incredibly disturbed by them. I’ve had to put up with the highly distressing experience of one of my support workers coming into my home and justifying rape because of those books, and that’s just the minor stuff. The biggest problem is that it encourages our culture to keep on glorifying sexual abuse, and women to accept it.
Oddly enough, I’m more worried about three books’ and a potential film’s worth of offensive material, where the offensive material is about encouraging rape and violence, than one solitary comment which is mildly homophobic. We should not be so accepting of this film that the only thing we think we need to worry about than the opinion of a random novelist about the proposed lead’s sexual orientation.
HAH. That reply from the – rather desperately named Bisexual woman of Edinburgh (I mean, as if we give a damn for so-called orientation or geographic reference?) – sits badly with her defence of Ellis’ works in her spit-back at me. Women hardly come out well treated in his American Psycho. But if it sells and puts food on her partner’s table I guess she’s willing to overlook that. Not nice to say, but her uncalled for and spiteful attack on me asked for it.
I really do need to come up with a new name, I agree. I think it was one of those “it was late and I was tired” things. It was probably because of the assumption in PN discussions that everyone here is a gay man.
I was defending Ellis’ work? Not that I noticed. I just mentioned that I see him on bookshop shelves a fair amount. I absolutely hated the two or three of his books which I read, and my opinion of him has sunk lower since this incident. But he does at least problematise sexual violence to some extent, which is more than you can say for “50 Shades of Grey”. Also he doesn’t go wittering on about inner goddesses all the time.
I also missed the part where I made a spiteful attack on you. Was it the part where I agreed with most of your points, and mildly mentioned that Ellis’ books still turn up in bookshops? How is that a reason to attack my partner’s livelihood? You’re a librarian, surely you are aware that many popular books are total trash and/or thoroughly offensive?
“It was probably because of the assumption in PN discussions that everyone here is a gay man.”–We aren’t. I’m a bisexual woman too, in fact, although in practice lesbian. Guess you had better get a new handle.
Bret EEllis hates himself ALOT
He’ss been ditched as screenwriter and is having a homophobic, sulky, hissy-fit. Let him get on with it. (P.S. Insider gossip – I’m a librarian and virtually no-one reads his (dated) stuff now anyway!)
Really? My partner’s a bookseller and Ellis seems to do fine, plus he was being taught at my university when I was there a few years ago.
Agreed on the hissyfit. He’s probably just courting celebrity by making this comment.
Well, there you go, Bisexual woman in Edinburgh. What can I say? There’s probably quite a difference nowadays between library users and book buyers. Dan Brown outstrips even Austen at tjhe moment in sales, but not in library-loans. Personally, I’m just glad people are still reading, but I know I’ll not be re-stocking his books next financial year. They don’t cut the mustard anymore. As for being taught at university, I’m afraid that one, while once impressive enough sounding, collapsed as a recommendation ever since Barbara Cartland was first added to reading lists in 1981!
Good point, I’ve seen some total rubbish on reading lists. Although this was a reasonably good course, but then a good course can still teach something that’s not of much literary merit because it illustrates a certain point well.
Personally I loathed Ellis, but I found his style hard to get through, and when everyone is telling you that it’s a good book, this can intimidate you out of saying, “Possibly in some respects, but it didn’t do a thing for me.” Liking a book is so subjective, after all, and I can see that Ellis does certain things well.
My partner’s a secondhand bookseller, it’s probably a slightly different market. I think they still get inundated with Dan Browns. People read it because of the hype, realise they don’t like it, and give it to charity.
I don’t get it…
Weren’t the two leads in Brokeband Mountain both straight actors? They did it fine… :S
By this logic, gay John Barrowman should be barred from playing bisexual Captain Jack Harkness..
What absolute rubbish! Acting is about acting. If there is any problem with MB playing this role, it’s because the audience won’t be able to think of him as anything else but gay…..yeah, right, I had that problem with Gandalf…
Gandalf wasn’t starring in a film made out of a porn novel, though. Unless there was some special edition of the Lord of the Rings which I never heard about.
To be honest, I think this partly depends on how sexually explicit the film is going to be, and the individual actor. No doubt there are plenty of actors who are not going to be comfortable or convincing doing sex scenes with someone from a gender to which they are not attracted. Considering the nature of the film, I can’t see the filmmakers missing this issue and neglecting to check with their potential leading man. It’s not as if they’re making Jane Austen adaptations here. They know perfectly well it’s about sex.
Jane Austen is pretty much about sex in a coy, under the petticoat way.
But acting is acting, still. A gay man can ACT attracted to a woman. It doesn’t mean he IS. Plenty of straight men ACT attracted to the female leads and vice versa. Surely not every male and female actor in every film churned out of Holywood is carrying on with each oter when the cameras are switched off? If they are, I think we need MORE gay and lesbian actors who can keep their hands to themselves after the director calls a wrap.
I was gonna say the same thing about Austen lol
The suggestion that a person’s own sexuality impedes their ability to play another show a fundamental misunderstanding of the actor’s craft. You don’t “act” attraction to someone. You say lines and perform actions through which the audience infers that you are attracted to them. Bret Easton Ellis really should know better.
Also the suggestion that the general public cares about quality acting is ludicrous. Look at twilight – they’re both horrendously lacklustre without a shred of chemistry yet the films have made billions.
I would hope that Matt wouldn’t stoop so low as to “star” in such dross in the first place!
Oh he would. Make no mistake about that.
Well lets tot up the list of straight actors in gay roles for comparison…
Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenthal in “Brokeback mountain”.
Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor in “I love you Pillip Morris”.
Sean Penn in “Milk”.
Michael C Hall in “Six feet under”
Jude Law in “Oscar”
Matt Damon in “The Talented Mr Ripley”
Robert De Niro in “Stardust”
Robin Williams in “The Birdcage”
Need I go on?
And as for gay actors never playing it straight… Rock Hudson did it for his entire career. It’s called acting.
The cast of another gay movie (except the dad)
Keanu Reeves & River Phoenix in “My Own Private Idaho”
Seth Green (& Macaulay Culkin but he was rubbish) in “Party Monster”
Guy Pearce, Hugo Weaving & Terence Stamp in “Priscilla Queen of the Desert” and for that matter Patrick Swayze, Wesley Snipes & John Leguizamo in “To Wong Foo…”
Leonardo DiCaprio in “Total Eclipse”
Greg Kinnear in “As Good As It Gets”
Jonathan Rhys Meyers & Ewan McGregor in “Velvet Goldmine”
Charlize Theron & Christina Ricci in “Monster”
Joseph Gordon-Levitt in “Mysterious Skin”
Phlip Seymour Hoffman in “Capote”
Colin Firth in “A Single Man”
Julianne Moore and Annette Bening in “The Kids Are All Right”
Beginning to think a list of openly gay actors who have played gay characters would be shorter…
Bret Easton Ellis is as disgusting as those gay agents who tell their gay clients to stay in the closet because ‘America isn’t ready for an openly gay actor’.
Bret Easton Ellis is correct – Hollywood is very homophobic. But the truly pathetic part of Hollywood homophobia is that the closet is maintained by disgusting hypocrites like Bret Easton Ellis.
Bret Easton Ellis is part of the problem. Matt Bomer is part of the solution.
However much you might decry their timidity, agents have jobs to do and their livelihood depends in successfully marketing their product, actors. In a perfect world you could hope they’d have some moral courage too, but the truth is most of them are just trying to stay in the business. And, as Ellis has only too disappointingly proved, many people in the USA – even supposedly intelligent ones – aren’t ready for out gay actors yet.
All the more praise for those agents who’re breaking the mould and promoting Bomer for this role, I’d say.
That does not make these spineless closeted agents any less contemptible and homophobic though
Also being an out gay actor is not the career killer that cowards like Bret Easton Ellis pretend it is (certainly on TV where there are plenty of out actors, and increasingly so in films)
It is deplorable in the extreme for gay or bi agents or writers to keep perpetuating this homophobic myth that being gay damages your career (as Ellen DeGeneres, Matt Bomer, Neil Patrick Harris; Anderson Cooper, Cynthia Nixon; Rosie O’Donnell; Jesse Tyler Ferguson; Zachary Quinto; Jim Parsons;Ian McKellen)
What needs to happen is that the openly gay actors and actresses need to start naming these shadowy closet cases who encourage people to remain closeted.
They are contributing to the culture of homophobia in the entertainment industry and they need to be acknowledged as they spineless scum they are.
I agree that they might be spineless, and this spinelessness is deplorable, but the truth is they have a job to do and a livelihood to earn and, like it or not, until very very recently it was the kiss of death for an actor to come out, it meant being forever typecast as The Gay Actor thereafter. (Heavens, not all that long ago it was the kiss of death for a non-gay actor to play a gay role! Michael Ontkean, anyone?)
Nobody could be happier than I am that this appears to be changing slowly; nevertheless, you are asking quite a lot of people (I mean the agents here) for them to put their livelihoods – and their clients’ – on the line for a cause they may well not believe in.
If my employer told me that I had to lie about my sexuality to keep my job, he’d be at an employment tribunal pretty quickly.
Job discrimination is wrong.
Any agent or manager who encourages or forces his client into being in the closet is a scumbag who does not deserve his/her career.
Which is why openly gay actors and actresse need to start identifying the agents who do this. They shoud not be working in the industry if they are promoting discrimination.
Yes, well, you and I are lucky to be working in the UK today: it hasn’t been as good as it currently is for very long, don’t forget – 15 years ago you couldn’t have served in the armed forces, and to this day you can’t be a professional footballer and gay.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you completely that it is deeply unpleasant that people should have to conceal their sexuality today; however, some agents might advocate it not only out of personal greed but also in their clients’ best interests, given the attitudes out there still. It takes a generation of brave people willing to risk everything to change entrenched attitudes. Not being in their shoes, I can’t condemn people who’re unwilling to risk their careers – it’s easy enough for me to pontificate, less easy for them as they have the bills to pay somehow.
There is a difference between silently giving in to oppression by concealing that you are part of an oppressed group, and actively attacking members of the group in question. Especially since people do have a right to a private life, so there is a certain case to be made for the right not to reveal your sexual orientation to the public. I don’t expect my optician, say, to reveal his sexual orientation to me, and would be horrified if he expected me to reveal mine.
I rejoice that more actors are feeling comfortable with coming out of the closet these days, and I agree that it helps to combat the culture of homophobia in the entertainment industry. But I do not believe in forcing them to do so. It has to be their choice.
My male partner and I are both bi, but we are not out to his family because they are strongly homophobic. Most of the queer people I know are closeted to somebody or other, and still manage to do good work for the LGBT community. Does that make us spineless scum?
If you are a financially independent adult, in a place with non-discrimination laws in place, then it is spineless to be in the closet (this is not true if you are financially dependent on others eg teenagers; or living in a place where you can be arrested or fired for your sexuality.)
People still choose to remain in the closet and that is their right, but it does not deserve respect.
An agent who encourages his/her client to remain closeted is utter scum. So much of the entertainment industry is thanks to the efforts of the LGBT community that to ask someone to remain closeted is completely unacceptable.
As for Matt Bomer – well a gay public figure has as much right to a private life as a straight celeb.
So if it is acceptable to reveal personal details about the private life of a straight celeb, then equally it is acceptable to do the same for a gay celeb.
They are public figures. No double standards.
I have to agree with dAVID that there is no good reason for an independent adult in this country to be in the closet to their family.
Homophobia is perpetuated by ignorance. People who “don’t know” any gay (or bi) people never have any reason to question their beliefs. “They couldn’t handle it” is not something you can judge before giving them the chance.
Members of my family who I had been the most reluctant to come out to because of casual homophobic remarks they’d made actually turned out to be a lot more understanding and accepthing than ones whose understanding I took for granted.
If it was the other way around, I’m sure he’d have no objections about a heterosexual actor playing a gay man in love with somebody. It happens all the time. This is just really petty on his part.
It’s not petty – it’s a homophobic double standard.
And whay makes it even more contemptible is that Ellis is gay (or bi) himself.
I read through this and my first thought was “Ok, so this dude is butthurt because he’s been turned down for the job, now he’s trying to discredit the whole thing, because if he can’t have it, no-one can.”
What a tool.
Also, for the love of god, why am I reading an article about 50 shades of Gray?
What he said is undoubtably wrong, but anyone here saying he’s a bad writer is living in dreamland.
Don’t demean your point by taking potshots at his work. It’s cheap.
He is a bad writer though.
His work is very stylised but it is deadwood. Lots of clever tricks to disguise the lack of heart or soul in any of his writing.
There was a reason he was regarded as being part of the Brat Pack of writers in the 1980′s – his work was cool and trendy.
But he never really outlived that label as his writing was not very good.
Mr Ellis hasn’t disclosed his sexuality, so it’s not too wide of the mark to assume that he’s a self-hating gay man. Why would he approve of a happily out gay man?
Or a self-hating bisexual.
But he is certainly not straight.
Which make his comments all the more ridiculous and contemptible.
He’s a pathetic creature.
What about the guy who played Will Truman in the series… Will & Grace? Oh!! Hang on, he is straight….
We had all this who plays who years ago Brett – get with the program, my experience can be, the difference between a straight man & a gay man is, one bottle of wine & soft lighting – and that works both ways, I have lady friends who have had enjoyable nights.
Is this an attempt for Brett Easton Ellis to stay relevant? Because its not working for the has been queen.
Ellis is a sad homosexual! He is self-hating and a big prick for what he said about Dan Savage’s ‘It Gets Better’ campaign. For a vast majority of LGBTQ folks..it did get better!Too bad it didn’t for you, Ellis! You also won’t be getting an a** from Bomer!
in American Psycho, Patrick Bateman is very much hinted at being a closeted homosexual. This makes Easton’s comments even more puzzling.
Bret Easton Ellis is himself a closet case.
Which would explain his own ridiculous homophobia and self-hatred.
Such a pity he didn’t remain closeted as a writer – we would have been spared his atrocious books.
Ellis is increasingly an embarrassment. A has-been, he is envious of anyone who is successful. He is desperate to get a little attention and will do it in ways that reveal his ignorance and stupidity.
And he’s supposed to be a writer. He’s stupid =|
Many of the greatest and most celebrated straight roles in the history of theatre, TV and film have been -and continue to be – played by Gay actors, both in and out of the closet. This is pure homophobia. No wonder so many Hollywood actors want to stay in the closet with these vile opinions floating around.
Matt has been very convincing on White Collar and Chuck. I never had a clue he was gay.
Maybe BEE needs to look within to see why he thinks that MB couldn’t play a straight loser from a crapola book on screen.
Totally aside from the fact his logic is so flawed…
Is Bret a closet Twi-hard or something? Why on Earth are his knickers in such a massive twist over such a terrible novel anyway??!
He’s such a talentless writer himself that he identifies very closely with thrash like ’50 Shades of Grey’?
Have you read his books?
They are thrash posing as something more.
Bret Easton Ellis wrote ONE compelling novel: “Less Than Zero.” After that, he’s been a stale hack thriving on sensationalism for more than three decades now. He is “an anal sphincter” or perhaps he’s merely had his head ensconced so deeply up his own lower intestnal tract for so long that he bears a striking resemblance to aforementioned alimentary egress.
Wow do NOT and I mean NEVER say anything bad about Matt and/or his acting especially on white collar. Matt is so much more successful and loved than BEE will ever be! It’s called action for a reason and u know what I’m proud of Matt! I am proud that he is proud of who he is! This BEE guy doesn’t know what good acting is. Next he will be saying bad stuff about Neil Patrick Harris.
What a daft, immature thing to say! We don’t insist that serial killers are played by murders, do we?
Has BEE never heard of acting? Apparently not, as he’s quoted as saying: “It’s about an intensely straight actor wanting absolutely to screw Ana Steele.”
NO, it’s not – it’s about someone acting well enough to convince the audience that that’s the case.
Why am I thinking of Rock Hudson in GIANT?
Why am I thinking of Tom Cruise in “Risky Business”? ;)
Umm, I’m not sure. Why anyone would think of Tom Cruise is beyond me.
If the straight actors in “Will & Grace” and numerous other TV shows can play gay men, why can’t gay one’s do straight?
After all, that is their job – they *pretend*.
Personally I don’t think they should even be making this book into a cinema movie. It’s an erotic novel… what point is there in making a movie that will have to dance around the sex scenes?
Regarding Ellis… there’s a screw loose. I have no idea why he wants to write a screenplay or has such a problem with homosexuals (good looking or not.) For a writer he isn’t very good at expressing himself in 140 characters? (don’t use Twitter so not sure if that’s correct!)
Let him have his hissy fit. Let’s hope this movie isn’t made.
Brett Easton Ellis has made a good point and should NOT be knocked.
My enjoyment of The Terminator was completely ruined when I was subsequently informed that Arnold Schwartzenegger wasn’t, in fact, a cyborg from the 23rd century.
well said! :o)
I know people want to be politically correct BUT can’t folks on this website just be honest? Do you REALLY THINK straight women want to see an actor they KNOW is gay in real life play a womanizer?
Actors are there to portray a role. It’s called “ACTING”.
You know that Christian Bale isn’t ACTUALLY a Batman, right? And Tom Hanks is in reality HIV-negative despite his role in Philadelphia? And Sigourney Weaver isn’t a real astronaut, despite Alien? And Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman aren’t real felons? And Leonardo di Caprio isn’t really in love with Kate Winslet? And …
‘Politically correct’ my arse…
the answer to that is the same as ‘did straight women lust after Rock Hudson, either before or AFTER coming out…? do straight women lust after George Michael…?’
…of course they bloody well do!! You just have to look at how many straight women fall all over themselves lusting after WestLife for fcvks sake! lol
Get with the program, Jake!
I doubt that’s a problem, since most would just imagine that he would turn straight for them, and they would be more thinking themselves into the actress’s position anyway. But most people go to heterosexual movies as a couple, and the woman may be distracted by the man scorning the actor as gay.
But the “acting straight” could be getting to be a problem in a new way, I fear. Increasing exposure to gay and lesbian people could well be making it more difficult for people to be seen as straight. In some sexual orientation really is “written on the body”, as sometimes is gender identity, and people may think they are getting more adept at reading it. Cultural manifestations are becoming more visible too.
Then there’s are those awful TV series in which guys win prizes for deceiving a woman that he is straight; when far to many women have found their marriages and lives destroyed by husbands who have been “deceiving them” (as it seems) in the same way. This may rebound on gay actors.
For me, Matt Bomer’s Neal does read as into Peter in White Collar, but that intense relationship is the point of the show. I find Neal’s relationships with women completely believable as well.
Provided they don’t make Christian Grey spend half the movie making eyes at a male co-star, I’m sure Mr Bomer could play him perfectly straight.
And don’t a lot of porn actors “perform” and “rise to the occasion” with the wrong gender relative to their orientation? Surely Matt Bomer can manage in a mainstream movie – he’s not actually going to be asked to f*** his co-star, is he?
But Mr Ellis is quite right that Matt Bomer shouldn’t play this part. He’s a perfectly good actor, with an endearing vulnerability. The last thing he needs is to stuff this turkey.
My vote is for Ian Somerhalder, who seems born to play controlling but charming rogues. He runs the gamut of emotions from a) sexy smirk to b) sexy pout, so I don’t think he’d be selling himself short.
How on earth is it that he thinks an openly gay ACTOR can’t play straight in a piece of chick flick mummy porn…?
I didnt notice anything he had to say about ostensibly straight actors playing gay in Brokeback Mountain…(he seems to think THAT was all about not playing ‘ugly’…)
…Not too bright methinks…
I thought (falsely) that writers are somewhat educated persons.I would like to remind/inform Mr.Ellis that since the beginning of acting (ancient greek theater) men where playing all the roles even those of women like Medea and Antigone.
But even if someone doesn’t knows about that fact is common sense that actors and actresses are supposed to play every role (Linda Hun won an oscar for playing a man i don’t recall anyone saying that she didn’t deserve it because she is a woman) our part is to like it or dislike it but to like or dislike something you first have to see it you stupid person.
seems he wants to just run his mouth .. and it would make me want to see the movie to see that hunk naked .. lol
and I that gay well yes I am lol
so by his reasoning you have to be a mass murderer to play one .. and i guess Linda Hunt was actually a dwarf asian man in the year of living dangerously .. lol .. this man is a total ass ..
what a tit
its acting, not who you are, i doubt christian bale really wears a bat suit and saves new york at night
He doesn’t? Dang and I was hoping Hale Berry wore her Cat Woman outft to Tesco all the time…You’ve destroyed my dream now and completely upset me…*walks off in a sulk!*
There are plenty of openly gay actors and actresses who have played ‘straight’ roles, just as there are plenty of straight actors playing gay roles.
Do you only have actors with children play parental roles? Or actors who are in wheelchaires play such roles?…no we don’t. As has already been said, they’re actors, it’s their job and that’s all it is! You play the role.
Anyone who saw Torchwood: Miracle Day, the 7th episode. The actor who played Jacks lover Angelo, the actor was straight and it was a very sexual scene!
And when you THINK about it, given how many of us have at some point given the impression we are straight, for what ever reason, it’s not that hard really! Though I’d have won no Oscar for my ability to play it ‘straight’ as everyone knew I was gay before I told them! lol
Wow asshole, maybe you are just jealous that Matt Bomer’s toes look 100 times better than your face. Keep your stupid opinion to your self.