Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“Of course Dee but noone else was telling people to stop posting”
“Of course Dee but noone else was telling people to stop posting”
True.
In the closet gay celebs! Who are they? (Part 2)
152 of 191
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“
I'd take some of your own advice if I were you.
So disagreeing about someone being gay based on very flimsy evidence is being rude is it?”
“
I'd take some of your own advice if I were you.
So disagreeing about someone being gay based on very flimsy evidence is being rude is it?”
Someone asked why people think Cheryl's gay, I was simply answering her question. I don't deserved to be attacked for it.
And if you think the evidence is flimsy, try posting a comment on a Mirror or Daily Mail article saying that Cheryl might be gay. It will be quickly deleted or not posted at all. You are allowed to post that she's talentless, fake, all kinds of insults, but any post about her not being straight is not allowed. Why do you think they would be deleting posts like that if there was no truth to the rumor? Try to post something, just for kicks, saying she's gay under a Cheryl article, I dare you. It won't be posted on the Daily Mail, and it'll be deleted after a few hours in the Mirror. This combined with all the blind items about her being gay.....the speculation is not flimsy
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“Someone asked why people think Cheryl's gay, I was simply answering her question. I don't deserved to be attacked for it.
And if you think the evidence is flimsy, try posting a comment on a Mirror or Daily Mail article saying that Cheryl might be gay. It will be quickly deleted or not posted at all. You are allowed to post that she's talentless, fake, all kinds of insults, but any post about her not being straight is not allowed. Why do you think they would be deleting posts like that if there was no truth to the rumor? Try to post something, just for kicks, saying she's gay under a Cheryl article, I dare you. It won't be posted on the Daily Mail, and it'll be deleted after a few hours in the Mirror. This combined with all the blind items about her being gay.....the speculation is not flimsy”
“Someone asked why people think Cheryl's gay, I was simply answering her question. I don't deserved to be attacked for it.
And if you think the evidence is flimsy, try posting a comment on a Mirror or Daily Mail article saying that Cheryl might be gay. It will be quickly deleted or not posted at all. You are allowed to post that she's talentless, fake, all kinds of insults, but any post about her not being straight is not allowed. Why do you think they would be deleting posts like that if there was no truth to the rumor? Try to post something, just for kicks, saying she's gay under a Cheryl article, I dare you. It won't be posted on the Daily Mail, and it'll be deleted after a few hours in the Mirror. This combined with all the blind items about her being gay.....the speculation is not flimsy”
I think describing a few people basically saying your post is nonsense as an 'attack' is a little bit dramatic.
That maybe true, but commenting saying she is gay is potentially libellous, calling her talentless is not.
Originally Posted by knickerlesscage:
“That maybe true, but commenting saying she is gay is potentially libellous, calling her talentless is not.”
“That maybe true, but commenting saying she is gay is potentially libellous, calling her talentless is not.”
Is it? I'm not sure a court has ever ruled that, actually. I can see why it might be, but I'm not sure whether it would be ruled like that.
Originally Posted by knickerlesscage:
“I think describing a few people basically saying your post is nonsense as an 'attack' is a little bit dramatic.
That maybe true, but commenting saying she is gay is potentially libellous, calling her talentless is not.”
“I think describing a few people basically saying your post is nonsense as an 'attack' is a little bit dramatic.
That maybe true, but commenting saying she is gay is potentially libellous, calling her talentless is not.”
Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous? What kind of backward society is this? Last time I checked it's 2015 and there was nothing wrong with being gay.
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous?”
“Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous?”
Like I said, I think it's possible that a court might decide that, but probably only in certain circumstances.
Originally Posted by Cryolemon:
“Like I said, I think it's possible that a court might decide that, but probably only in certain circumstances.”
“Like I said, I think it's possible that a court might decide that, but probably only in certain circumstances.”
I'd be pretty shocked and appaulled if a court ruled that saying you think someone's not straight is libellious, I think there'd quite an outcry if that happened.
Didn't Jason Donovan sue The Face magazine or some other rag in the early 90s for saying he was gay?
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“I'd be pretty shocked and appaulled if a court ruled that saying you think someone's not straight is libellious, I think there'd quite an outcry if that happened.”
“I'd be pretty shocked and appaulled if a court ruled that saying you think someone's not straight is libellious, I think there'd quite an outcry if that happened.”
I wouldnt be pleased, but given how strict British courts are with libel I wouldnt be too shocked.
Originally Posted by square-root:
“Didn't Jason Donovan sue The Face magazine or some other rag in the early 90s for saying he was gay?”
“Didn't Jason Donovan sue The Face magazine or some other rag in the early 90s for saying he was gay?”
Early 90s attitudes to sexuality were a lot different to current ones. And if it was settled out of court then theres no precedent.
Originally Posted by square-root:
“Didn't Jason Donovan sue The Face magazine or some other rag in the early 90s for saying he was gay?”
“Didn't Jason Donovan sue The Face magazine or some other rag in the early 90s for saying he was gay?”
Yes and no
He sued them because they claimed he was lying when he said he wasn't gay.
Originally Posted by alaninmcr:
“Yes and no He sued them because they claimed he was lying when he said he wasn't gay.”
“Yes and no
He sued them because they claimed he was lying when he said he wasn't gay.”
Ah, now that's a different thing entirely. Wrongly claiming someone is lying is definitely libel.
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous? What kind of backward society is this? Last time I checked it's 2015 and there was nothing wrong with being gay.”
“Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous? What kind of backward society is this? Last time I checked it's 2015 and there was nothing wrong with being gay.”
Of course there's nothing wrong with being gay Sulala. However if someone is straight and they're not gay then a publication hinting at the latter is printing incorrect information.
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“Of course there's nothing wrong with being gay Sulala. However if someone is straight and they're not gay then a publication hinting at the latter is printing incorrect information.”
“Of course there's nothing wrong with being gay Sulala. However if someone is straight and they're not gay then a publication hinting at the latter is printing incorrect information.”
To be libel though you have to prove it causes harm, not that its simply untrue.
Originally Posted by Cryolemon:
“To be libel though you have to prove it causes harm, not that its simply untrue.”
“To be libel though you have to prove it causes harm, not that its simply untrue.”
Fair point.
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“Of course there's nothing wrong with being gay Sulala. However if someone is straight and they're not gay then a publication hinting at the latter is printing incorrect information.”
“Of course there's nothing wrong with being gay Sulala. However if someone is straight and they're not gay then a publication hinting at the latter is printing incorrect information.”
Libellious
"containing an untrue written statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone"
Being gay is not a bad thing. Therefore saying you think someone is gay is not libelous. I sense some lingering uncomfortability with homosexuality in this thread. There's absolutely nothing wrong with speculating about a celebrity's sexuality, just the same as there's nothing wrong with speculating who a celebrity is dating or or if a celebrity is getting divorced or anything else.
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous? What kind of backward society is this? Last time I checked it's 2015 and there was nothing wrong with being gay.”
“Seriously? Saying you think someone is gay could be libelous? What kind of backward society is this? Last time I checked it's 2015 and there was nothing wrong with being gay.”
It could possibly be libellous to 'accuse' a man who is in a relationship with a woman or married of being gay ie. the implication would be that he was a liar and deceitful and living a double life.
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“Libellious
"containing an untrue written statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone"
Being gay is not a bad thing. Therefore saying you think someone is gay is not libelous. I sense some lingering uncomfortability with homosexuality in this thread. There's absolutely nothing wrong with speculating about a celebrity's sexuality, just the same as there's nothing wrong with speculating who a celebrity is dating or or if a celebrity is getting divorced or anything else.”
“Libellious
"containing an untrue written statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone"
Being gay is not a bad thing. Therefore saying you think someone is gay is not libelous. I sense some lingering uncomfortability with homosexuality in this thread. There's absolutely nothing wrong with speculating about a celebrity's sexuality, just the same as there's nothing wrong with speculating who a celebrity is dating or or if a celebrity is getting divorced or anything else.”
No being gay is no bad thing, but since Cheryl is married (twice, i think) it would mean she had lied, either to her fans, to her husbands - or both. Its not really anyones business, but shes in the public eye so people seem to think it is, so yes it could cause some people to have a bad opinion of her.
I think she, or anyone else in that position, would have to prove actual damages though.
[quote=Sulala;80546329]I'd be pretty shocked and appaulled if a court ruled that saying you think someone's not straight is libellious, I think there'd quite an outcry if that happened.[/QUOTE]
No there wouldnt be an outcry. If it was said with malice it could be classed as libelous or slanderous, a lie is a lie.
No there wouldnt be an outcry. If it was said with malice it could be classed as libelous or slanderous, a lie is a lie.
[quote=jackol;80569264]
You need to give it up already. Saying you think a celeb is gay isn't slander or libelous, end of. If a gay slur is used, for example, it would be hate speech, not slander or libel. Lies in and of themselves aren't slander or libel, which has been pointed out to you by other posters several times.
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“I'd be pretty shocked and appaulled if a court ruled that saying you think someone's not straight is libellious, I think there'd quite an outcry if that happened.[/QUOTE]
No there wouldnt be an outcry. If it was said with malice it could be classed as libelous or slanderous, a lie is a lie.”
“I'd be pretty shocked and appaulled if a court ruled that saying you think someone's not straight is libellious, I think there'd quite an outcry if that happened.[/QUOTE]
No there wouldnt be an outcry. If it was said with malice it could be classed as libelous or slanderous, a lie is a lie.”
You need to give it up already. Saying you think a celeb is gay isn't slander or libelous, end of. If a gay slur is used, for example, it would be hate speech, not slander or libel. Lies in and of themselves aren't slander or libel, which has been pointed out to you by other posters several times.
Originally Posted by Sulala:
“Libellious
"containing an untrue written statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone"
Being gay is not a bad thing. Therefore saying you think someone is gay is not libelous. I sense some lingering uncomfortability with homosexuality in this thread. There's absolutely nothing wrong with speculating about a celebrity's sexuality, just the same as there's nothing wrong with speculating who a celebrity is dating or or if a celebrity is getting divorced or anything else.”
“Libellious
"containing an untrue written statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone"
Being gay is not a bad thing. Therefore saying you think someone is gay is not libelous. I sense some lingering uncomfortability with homosexuality in this thread. There's absolutely nothing wrong with speculating about a celebrity's sexuality, just the same as there's nothing wrong with speculating who a celebrity is dating or or if a celebrity is getting divorced or anything else.”
I agree there is nothing wrong with speculating about sexuality. However that wasn't what you said before. You said previously this this was a thread about in the closet gay celebs. It's not. It's a speculation thread.
Originally Posted by Airborae:
“Getting back on track.....
Any news on Jonathan Taylor Thomas?”
“Getting back on track.....
Any news on Jonathan Taylor Thomas?”
If only.
Had to google Jonathon, still don't know who he is.
Originally Posted by Cloudy2:
“If only.
Had to google Jonathon, still don't know who he is.”
“If only.
Had to google Jonathon, still don't know who he is.”
I'm old enough to remember
152 of 191
