Opinion Celebrations that 'Gaylor is dead' are a cruel reminder that homophobia isn’t - Celebrating the 'death' of a queer fandom is unhinged behavior, actually.

Link (Archive)

Celebrations that 'Gaylor is dead' are a cruel reminder that homophobia isn’t​

All week the whole internet has been abuzz about Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce getting engaged, but the celebration is tainted by another darker celebration underneath the surface — one cheering on the death of "Gaylorism."

Over the years, more and more fans have wondered whether Swift might be queer. There are endless blogs and social media accounts dedicated to queer interpretations of her lyrics, speculation about her relationships with certain gal pals, and communal discussion of potential queer flagging.

As those numbers have grown, so have the number of people who are not just incredulous, but actively furious, at the idea that anyone might think this way, let alone dare to voice it out loud. And with the announcement of Swift's engagement, some of those anti-Gaylor fans (often dubbed Hetlors for their refusal to consider anything outside of a heteronormative lens) have declared any discussion on the matter over and done.

"GAYLORS ARE OFFICIALLY DEAD," one X account dramatically proclaimed.

The comment has racked up over 37,000 likes, and it's hardly the only one of its ilk. Since Swift and Kelce announced their engagement, celebrations of the news have walked side-by-side with celebrations of a more sinister type — ones mocking fans who found solace and community in queer readings of Swift's lyrics and who, in some instances, have now turned to their peers and friends to wonder whether they were wrong. Even publications have latched onto the opportunity to mine Gaylor reactions for content, focusing on the popular subreddit going private after other Swifties circulated screenshots in a derogatory fashion.

It's not the first time this has happened. Hetlors have declared their counterparts dead time and time again, like when she's gotten into a new relationship or when she's dropped a song explicitly referencing a man. In addition to being wildly dismissive of the existence of bisexuality, there's something almost comically villainous about a cackling celebratory dance on the metaphorical grave of a whole group of people over the triumph of heteronormativity.

Hetlors will line up with a thousand reasons as to why this is perfectly acceptable behavior, actually. They will claim speculating about celebrities' sexualitiesand their love lives is intrusive behavior (only when the speculation is queer, of course). They will disparage Gaylors for wild conspiracy theories and looking for hidden clues in her music and videos (nevermind that being a Taylor Swift fan has always revolved heavily around Easter eggs and secret messages).

"We don't love & support Tay because of her sexuality. We love her music, personality & kindness," one anti-Gaylor account said earlier this month. Meanwhile, her sexuality becomes all-important when it gives Hetlors a chance to curb stomp fans who have the audacity to interpret anything she does through a queer lens.

First of all, let's be clear on one thing — Gaylors are doing just fine. Yes, it's true some weren't thrilled with the news. But combing through any Gaylor space over the last few days has mostly provided jokes and memes and "Bejeweled"-themed conspiracy theories. Because, again, this ultimately isn't new. For now, Gaylors are thriving. Because for the majority of them, it isn't about whether a singer marries a football player. It's about community, goofy theories (no matter how seriously they're taken), and finding things in Swift's music that resonate with their own experience. In other words, it's not that different from being any other kind of Swifty.
IMG_4747.webp
But for those who are experiencing a certain level of grief, well, there's plenty for queer Swift fans to mourn in this Travis Kelce-centric era. It wasn't that long ago that Swift was hanging out with and promoting queer artists, and declaring her intention to be more vocal about her politics and social justice. Those things have disappeared. Now, her world is made up of MAGA WAGs and public silence — unless the family a friend of mine likes to call "the wannabe Kardashians of the midwest" have something that needs a little publicity boost.

It's been a disappointing shift, and one a number of fans have struggled to reckon with. To continue having to do so while the rest of the world is having a celebration so big that it seems to eclipse the impactof everything else she's accomplished over the years could certainly add a layer of frustration. Not just because it's the antithesis of everything Swift herself has become, but also because of the broader context of what's been happening in queer pop music lately.

Despite some people's insistence that Gaylors don't engage with "actual" queer music, the reality is that many, if not most, of them do. And the last few months have been an obnoxious whirlwind of events. As JoJo Siwa and Fletcher have announced their relationships with men, queer fans have had to watch endless streams of comments telling them how much happier and freer they both seem. Siwa insisted she was pressured into calling herself a lesbian and rebranded her tour into something notably less gay. Fletcher has been extremely measured and thoughtfulwith her fans, but anyone who expressed disappointment at possibly losing sapphic songs was branded biphobic by other fans. Then you've got Betty Who jumping into the fray to suggest Renée Rapp, a lesbian who has declared she will never date a man, could fall in love with a dude some day, which Who said was the best thing that ever happened to her, personally.

It's just been a full mess of a summer. And one where sapphic fans have repeatedly been sent the same message — hetero-presenting relationships are the pinnacle of achievement. They warrant celebration that sapphic relationships never could. It is only in the joining of man and woman that true happiness can be found.

Obviously, Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce getting engaged is not a slight against queer fans. But there's a culmination here. Swift has struggled with public validation her entire career. She didn't find it until her queer friends and brief foray into political outspokenness were replaced by a football player and the hope of a ring. Throw that into the mix of everything previously stated, the ongoing decline of queer representation in media, and the current administration threatening LGBTQ+ rights at every turn, and it's just been a really bleak landscape as of late.

And that's why fans and publications gleefully mocking Gaylors and pronouncing them "dead" is so unequivocally fucked up. On the surface, it's just fandom drama. But underneath, the subtext is that queer fans should be put in their place, that queer readings of media are deserving of mockery, and that this is all, somehow, a battle to be acted out until heteronormativity triumphs in the end.

People will balk at this conclusion, but you simply cannot divorce something happening within a singular fandom from the greater societal context, and the current context is that LGBTQ+ acceptance and visibility is on the precipice of regression, if not arguably already there. We can sit here and debate whether or not it's appropriate to speculate about celebrities' sexualities until Swift has dropped another 1300 vinyl variants, but that doesn't change the fact that this is about a much bigger picture than one singer's personal life.

"i became a gaylor because of taylor's homophobic fans," one person tweeted earlier this year, "and every time i want to distance myself from gaylorism i remember that gaylortwit is the safest place on the internet i've ever been."

That some Swifties — certainly no fewer than 37,000 of them — seem to find joy in trampling a safe queer space just because people within it are debating whether songs might be about Dianna or Karlie rather than Joe or Matty is seriously dark.

I've personally gone on at length about how damaging it is to actual queer people to insist that queerness must be loudly proclaimed in order to be seen as valid, so I won't do that again here, just like I won't spend as much time as I would like to harping on the double standards at play, as relevant as they are. But what I will do is point out that there's a difference between disagreeing with the way some people engage with fandom or celebrity and acting as if cheering on the destruction of a place within fandom where queerness is normalized is somehow morally commendable.

If people want to pretend that all of this isn't rooted in homophobia, so be it. But for anyone on the fence, or wondering why they might feel uncomfortable with how this is playing out without fully grasping why, it's be worth remembering that there are always people watching. And right now, the narrative playing out is one that says queer community only deserves to exist on terms that heteronormative society is comfortable with. We've seen that film before — and we didn't let it end that way for a reason.
 
They used to do this sort of queering to dead people and fictional characters. With Taylor Swift, they started openly doing it to someone alive and in (sort-of) the real world.

Trying to put a sexual orientation on someone at random is a weird, immature and frankly porny thing to be doing.

But somehow being critical of these weirdos is now "homophobia".

And right now, the narrative playing out is one that says queer community only deserves to exist on terms that heteronormative society is comfortable with. We've seen that film before — and we didn't let it end that way for a reason.

I dont really want to hear straight people's gooner fantasies about celebrities either. Can't you find some real gay people hooking up to make your sexual fantasies about rather than inventing them?
 
Swifties are a cult. For all we know she's a closet case like John Travolta. But her team isn't going to let that slip even if it were true. She's so astroturfed that you can see it from space. Her fans are too stupid and obsessed to see that they are part of the whole marketing strategy. As long as they terminally online for Taylor Swift then Taylor Swift stays trending.
All celebrities at the level of Taylor Swift have lives that are carefully curated for the public. It honest shocks me that more people don't understand this. She could be having coke fueled dyke orgies every Sunday but the public wouldn't know about it because it doesn't fit her brand or her target audience which is mostly older zoomer and millenial normie women who grew up listening to her because she was a "cleaner alternative" to the regular pop sluts at the time. I suspect she understands this and realizes that her fan demographic is starting to age out of the youth pop scene. She's not going to be able to be the pop idol for Gen Alpha or whatever is next in her forties and fifties.

Marrying some guy and popping out a few kids (most likely with IVF and surrogates) will let her be relatable to middle aged women. There will be a lot of buzz around her wedding then in a few years she will have kids and that will also keep her in the news. In 20 years, I bet she ends up doing some acting or a talk show gig like the View.
 
All celebrities at the level of Taylor Swift have lives that are carefully curated for the public.
Hell, I'm not rich or famous and I know plenty of people that curate their own images because branding is a big deal when you're in the leadership of any industry anywhere ever.

Here's the thing, I don't think most people know this. About 12 years ago, I was working as a contractor and the branch chief took me aside and recommended a book to me. This book was about a guy who became the first black guy on the board at IBM (I forget the book). The book wasn't about building teams or rah-rah I'm a good leader bullshit. It was about what you wore, who you hung out with, what you participate in and what you own when you've reached a certain class/income bracket, and how to use that to climb the ladder if you really wanted to.

I don't remember the author or the name of the book, but one passage about something he wore (a certain color shirt or tie) stuck with me, about how he didn't think too hard about the details of his outfit, but everyone else wore something in particular, like a blue shirt versus a white shirt. And, duh. You always need to show that you're one of the people you'd like to ingratiate yourself with.

Most people don't want to face the reality that you're stuck with being a conformist no matter where you are in life. It's all a matter of dressing for the job you want.

Back to topic: Swift knows how to talk to the people most inclined to buy what she's selling. She is beige personified: she's not controversial and doesn't make people think beyond a certain intellectual level or experience set. And a lot of women (who don't like to admit it, but will damn near buy into Taylor Swift, the brand) aren't that special and haven't grown past the sort of thing Swift is selling.

If I know that branding is important, Swift's team not only knows it, but will sell it back to her audience at a premium.
 
"Queer lens"

These idiots can't even explain the difference (or similarity) between gay and queer.
If heterosexual male AGPs are "queer" just by putting on a dress--clearly the word means nothing.

Somebody tell this person they wasted all those words on BS.
 
This will be interesting. Kelce is going to retire and for things to do post retirement he is going to probably stay around the Chiefs org plus he is opening a new steak house with mahomes. I assume they will try to start a family. Are swifties going to see the new happy family and want that for themselves now? Will the queer baiting and transtrenders want to fit in with the new trad family esthetic? I am being extreme but i think there will be some turmoil....what if this couple causes a baby boom? What if the couple solves gayness and birthrates? Lol
Cue Law and Order episode where Kelce is murdered by a well connected sick fuck tranny Swiftie who killed kelce to "save her from a sham marriage", only for it to come out at trial that Kelce is the faggot and Swift's been whoring around with Taylor Lewan all this time and pregnant with his bastard that the three were going to pass off as Kelce's since Lewan is married. And that In the end, the whole trial becomes moot because the defendant flees to Illinois since, as Governor Pritzker's tranny son-daughter, there is nothing that can be done to extradite him back to NYC to face trial for murdering Kelce.
 
"Queer lens"

These idiots can't even explain the difference (or similarity) between gay and queer.
If heterosexual male AGPs are "queer" just by putting on a dress--clearly the word means nothing.

Somebody tell this person they wasted all those words on BS.
Disagree. Queer means broken. A "straight" man pretending to be a woman to get with women in pretend homosexuality is clearly broken, and therefore queer. Homosexuals, either genuine, or pretend are broken people.
 
Plot twist: Swift is a regular hetero woman and all this gay shit was started by her manager as a way to drum up attention and make her marketable to faggots.
 
This article is really doing some heavy lifting to cover up the truth: Gaylors are incredibly aggressive gays (mostly fags, some dykes) that harass the boyfriends of the woman they claim to admire, calling them gay or insisting their feelings aren't real and it's all a big conspiracy. They are the most insufferable Swifties (!) and that is why everyone is laughing at them.

The total sum of evidence that Taylor is gay is that... she hangs around women and hugs them. That's all it takes for these spergs to start fantasizing.
 
What amuses me is how lesbos pick the most lilywhite Barbie looking women to head canon into being gay instead of accepting reality.
 
Over the years, more and more fans have wondered whether Swift might be queer. There are endless blogs and social media accounts dedicated to queer interpretations of her lyrics, speculation about her relationships with certain gal pals, and communal discussion of potential queer flagging.
This is the unhinged behavior, by the way.

I cannot believe so many fucking words were devoted to something of such little import (re: this article.)
 
This is what people go to college for nowadays. To learn how to write a lot of words explaining how not mad they are about a thing they are mad about and it’s your fault for being a bigot.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole