Comments on: Welcome Out Jodie Foster

By: Andrew

Andrew — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 00:38:25 +0000

Terribly unimpressed. Her speech came across as whiny and more. No one required that she stay in the business that created the drama so early in her life – she chose to do that. And in so doing, she earned more than enough money to maintain her privacy as she saw fit. You want the money, you gotta play the game. She wants it both ways. And she wanted it thus with her sexuality as well – to profit from all the hard work of activists while protecting herself. Yeah, she’s a fine director, and she’s done some nice parts with roles (and some stinkers), and she’s freakin gorgeous… but the defensiveness etc. just struck me as profoundly ungrateful for such a remarkably privileged life.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 21:22:55 +0000

Fenris Wolf,

To be fair to Lucrece, not everyone knows all about the Hinkley issue. Many many younger people know who she is, but do not know about the entire Hinkley aspect and his obsession with her and Taxi Driver.

Yes, gun to head analogy may be deemed insensitive, but for goodness sake, do you expect the entire english speaking world to do away with metaphors invlving guns? If so, I suggest you take it up with Vice President Biden before slamming commentators here. He recently said he “aimed” to have a recomendation on the Presidents desk by Tuesday, he also used the phrase “shooting for”. One cannot expect the metaphors of a thousand years to go by the way side because of a shooting. You are a tool to chastise someone then turn to your little quip about rape. Yeah, keep it classy.

By: Gene in L.A.

Gene in L.A. — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:12:02 +0000

Coming out has never been an act done for other people. Why do we insist gay celebrities become “role models”? For how long has it been unspoken knowledge that Jodie Foster is gay? What in the world is there that demands we open ourselves to the public in our private lives, no matter who we are or what we do. For all the gods’ sakes, leave Jodie Foster alone. Her product is what we’re interested in, isn’t it? Why, because their livelihood is in front of us up on that screen, does it mean everything about movie stars must also be our property? It’s not, and we should stop expecting it to be.

By: Fenris Wolf

Fenris Wolf — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 18:35:39 +0000

For those who didn’t “get it”, read it over a few times, slowly: “I already did my coming out about a thousand years ago back in the Stone Age, in those very quaint days when a fragile young girl would open up to trusted friends, family, co-workers and then gradually, proudly to everyone who knew her, to everyone she actually met. But now apparently, I’m told that every celebrity is expected to honor the details of their private life with a press conference, a fragrance, and a prime time reality show.”

TO EVERYONE SHE ACTUALLY MET is “none of us commenting here,” actually. None of us keeping tabs of how many times she did or didn’t deny something – or what she did or didn’t do at what time for what group or individual(s). None of us feigning amusement, declaring that everyone had already known this, and it was, therefore, insignificant. And none of us who have never done the day in day out hard slog of acting/directing/producing for 47 years. “Nobody put a gun to her head?” Bravo, Lucrece! Given the events of the past month, and her personal history as the focus of a madman’s obsession, that little snippy bit of bitchery may be the most insensitive, ham-handed and inappropriate metaphor that could possibly have been employed. You give the title “Rape of Lucrece” an entirely new meaning.

By: iDavid

iDavid — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:48:29 +0000

Mel looked like “huh? wtf. ur gay? but I’m Catholic! So ya didn’t find me sexy, huh. no wonder that movie we made together sucked”.
Have another drink there Mel.

What an amazingly riveting speech. Bravo to Jodi for coming right from her threads.

By: gsingjane

gsingjane — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:07:14 +0000

I don’t really understand this… I must be missing something, but I do seem to recall Jodi Foster repeatedly denying that she was lesbian. To me that seems a little different than, “I was fragile and I came out to a few people close to me instead of the world at large.” I mean I don’t meant to jump all over the woman, she has the right to do what she wants and say what she wants, but I certainly don’t remember her being supportive when it could have done other folks some good…

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:41:57 +0000

Yeah. That’s what I was thinking. Privacy. She still got stalked by those creeps with cameras.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:19:13 +0000

Lucrese,

I think the resentment is about the lack of privacy in general. Or that’s how I took it.

By: Lucrece

Lucrece — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 07:26:03 +0000

Why the resentment? Nobody put a gun to her head to come out. She reads like Sean Hayes in the petty way they respond to coming out conferences/confirmations.

You see no straight people keep the fact that they have a spouse “private”. You do not offer details about your spouse, but at least you don’t hide the fact that you have a spouse and are rarely seen publicly with him/her.