Well I wouldn't apply my "oh-so-advanced logic" to comments since then my argument would become illogical.

Anyway melren thanks for proving my earlier point. What this article sees as 'acceptance' is actually 'tolerance' which is a different thing.

Someone like malren clearly 'tolerates' NPH being gay because malren enjoys his work. Great. But if you read that first comment - melren certainly isn't 'accepting' of it.

Yeah, I am so sure "Doogie" wants you to focus on the fact that he's "queer." Oh wait, he actually said the exact opposite of that.

By the way, if you applied your oh-so-advanced logic about posts you don't like to comments you don't like, I guess you;d never have replied to me, eh?

It's called hypocrisy. Look it up.

Hey malren.

It's called TV Squad.
As in Television.
As in this is a story involving television.
As in TV.
As in TV Squad.

And a word of advice. You know what I do when there's a post about something I'm not interested in? I ignore it. You can do it too.

So now when "some jagoff media person" writes about this "non-topic" I suggest you save yourself some grey hairs and simply move along. It's obviously not a 'non-topic' to some of us.

Doogie's here. He's Queer. Get used to it.

The only time I EVER think about Neil Patrick Harris being gay is when some jagoff media person feels the need to write yet ANOTHER story on this non-topic.

HINT frigging HINT, TV Squad.

When I look at him, I see a guy that was on one of my favorite shows years ago and is now the number one reason to watch one of my new favorite shows, and when "Met Your Mother" dies, I will look for him in any and everything else because he's a highly skilled performer.

Period. End of god-damned sentence.

America hates gays and anything that isn't from the "Leave it to Beaver" world. I also love how they complain about violence and how it's bad for children yet they invite everyone to Passion of the Fucknig Christ.

Actually many of the people in Hollywood making these decisions ARE GAY themselves. Thus their hesitation.

I don't think it's all about 'self-loathing' but I do think that plays a part (the article mentions it then DROPS the topic like a hot potato). I think a larger factor is the unpredictable beast that is America's homophobia and what Hollywood thinks it must do to placate it. It was (is) the same story with Jews in Hollywood and their struggle with America's antisemitism.

When everyone tells them 'hey, you're behind on the times, America LOVES YOU NOW!' then they watch Mel Gibson's (no lover of either group) last film take in tens of millions of dollars at the Box Office they remain justifiably skeptical and paranoid.

(see Crash's Oscar win over Brokeback for more evidence of this)

When a film about a gay, Jewish James Bond (with a husband) does 100 million at the Box Office its opening weekend then they'll chill.

(and no a closeted megastar who belongs to a freaky cult doesn't count as progress)

Okay.

Hollywood is far from progressive. Television doesn't really represent the various cultures we have here in America, so it is no surprise that they are equally gunshy about how gay actors or actresses will be treated. I applaud both TRK and NPH for speaking up. I have always thought that the more gay people who speak up for themselves, the more people would realize that gay people are a part of the everydays lives.

It was an interesting article. My naive perception was that the people in Hollywood were much more progressive than that.

The article suggests that the public "yawned" over the news that they were gay, but I'm sure it didn't go unnoticed to aspiring actors and actresses hoping that they too will be accepted for who they are. The struggles of gay people today will hopefully lead to less struggles for those of tomorrow.

Adam, stop being so naive and get off your soapbox. The cost of being a celebrity is to have your life exposed to the media. It may not be FAIR, but what in life is?