Lindsay Lohan tweets a lot. Lindsay Lohan tweets so much and so inanely that virtually every news source in the world including us, your cousin who reads a lot of TMZ, and Samantha Ronson’s twitter feed have ceased to comment on them. Except now we cannot stop ourselves from doing so, because in the wake of the recent gay marriage victory in New York that you may or may not have heard about, Lindsay Lohan’s twitter feed is just too bizarre. We have to talk about this.
Because the thing is, Lindsay Lohan’s Twitter feed so far has a 100% solid fucking gold track record of either being COMPLETELY oblivious to any major happenings in terms of marriage equality – even or especially when they are heartbreaking and awful and bring the rest of us to tears. (Aside from that special myspace blog post she wrote about equality, kinda, while she was dating Samantha, which was sweet, I think, if I remember it correctly.)
Which is maybe not weird, considering that Lindsay Lohan is by all accounts a very busy young starlet with a lot going on and various court dates to attend and many friends to drive cars with and clubs to be photographed outside of. But also, she is for some people one of the more relatable queer public figures they have – she’s young, she’s firm in her refusal to let anyone define her as “gay” or “straight,” and has had a public relationship with another woman without apologizing for it. So it would be nice if she maybe acknowledged at least that there is something huge going on that deeply affects a community to which she at least kind of is aware of belonging to. But no!
For instance: on November 4, 2009 – which some of us think of as the day that the voter referendum in Maine was lost, and our hearts broke – Lindsay Lohan had a lot of feelings about her father’s relationship with the tabloids, and not much else.
Or on December 2, 2009, when the first attempt at marriage equality in New York was shot down:
There’s a theme here, no? The theme mostly being no theme, at least definitely not a theme of “using your public platform as an out celebrity to recognize the monumental injustice and enormous levels of discrimination that your fellow queers are facing.” Is that too much to ask of a celebrity whose other concerns include ex-girlfriends who wear a lot of slouchy hats and frequent court dates? Maybe. Which is why we’d given up pretty much on any sort of reflection of our queer selves outside of our irrationally strong feelings about Samantha Ronson in this one leggings-focused little corner of the internet.
BUT THEN marriage equality became a reality in New York, and while that elicited an emotional state that was about 95% “gleeful,” “ecstatic,” “celebratory,” and “lesbian executive realness,” we later checked Twitter and the other 5% was “Whaaaaa? Lindsay what?”
And then —
This may literally be the gayest thing Lilo has ever tweeted. Including every late-night lesbian drama mention of Sam Ronson. Also, those playing along from home will note that she has only recently changed her profile picture to an Adam Bouska NO H8 photo.
What is going on? Is the fact that we finally, finally won a thing as opposed to being denied equality at every single turn enough to make her identify with us in some obtuse way? Does she just really, uh, admire Annette Bening? Is it insane to spend this much time or text thinking about this? (I am sure we will find out your feelings on that last in the comments!) What would a Lilo/Cholodenko collaboration even look like? Am I the only one on Earth who thinks this is incredibly weird? WE HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS.
Wait, but didn’t Lindsay say “GO NY!” here? http://mycdn.theexcitantgroup.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/SamRo-Tweets-Updated1.jpg
I read it on autostraddle! Didn’t that acknowledge what was going on and was gay? I’m confused about everything.
Yeah Linds has tweeted a boat load of support, go ny, retweets, etc messages since Friday. I can’t tell if Rachel is alluding to that or not.
I mean, I assume all these positive and acknowledging tweets all of a sudden are the very thing that’s making Rachel so frustrated?
Or, you know, we could not worry about what “LiLo” thinks, because she doesn’t matter at all
now where’s the fun in that?
Her tweets have been pretty clear from last fri to sunday. She’s been pretty vocal about it. What is it you don’t understand again?
She’s from NY, likes girls occasionally, and is happy something good happened? I mean I understand what you mean at her not getting mad about “injustices” in the past, but I doubt she really keeps herself in the loop enough to be an active participant in such commenting.
Maybe she only likes repeating good news since her life is always filled with so much bad news these days? Ie: Lindsay you’re going to be in Machete but your hair is going to look awful.
*confused even more*
I think she plays for our team to an extent, she just lives too much in the public eye to really find herself. Perhaps she’s just a sexual person and likes whoever pulls her in the most.
I assume you know she was dating/hooking up with another girl last year under wraps? It got out but wasn’t as huge a story since they didn’t fight in public all the time.
Being labeled a “gay” actress, when her career is already sketchy is something that most likely terrifies her. Which obvs she shouldn’t feel this way, but girl has a crazy life with (it seems) very few people that actually know how to give her real advice/support. As if she would listen anyway? I don’t like saying that, I hope it’s not true.
The way she fought with Sam made it very obvs that despite her labeling as bi or whatever, she was intensely latched into that relationship, for whatever reason. Perhaps she’s just co-dependent. Idk. She troubles me as well.
“Maybe she only likes repeating good news since her life is always filled with so much bad news these days?”
I think you’re right.
Work with Lisa Cholodenko? I have a great plot for that film, an out lesbian could suddenly out of the blue decide to fuck the sperm donor of her children, that’s original, right?
She’s under lock down. Hell if I were her, by this point I’d be tweeting every bugger I picked.
i would need a lot more than 140 characters to do mine justice, js.
Um, don’t care. In fact, care so little that if I hadn’t already been logged in to my AS account, I wouldn’t have left a comment.
Can we please talk about someone more awesome and deserving of our queer time, like… anyone?
I think the article is stressing that Lindsay Lohan seems more focused on same sex issues when usually she stays away from the discussing one of the most important human rights movements of our time. It is nice to see. I know she said some good things in 2008 but since then she has not been as vocal in her support in the way most out GLBT celebrities have. She and Samantha, the only person she has been in a romance with in the last 3 years, both seem hesitant about being outspoken on GLBT rights but that is their right. One would hope they are more vocal and embrace their opportunity. I do comprehend that we all choose how involved we are and it is their business.
I think you got it wrong. Please read again Lilo tweets and you will realize she did tweeted a lot regarding NY gay marriage legalization.
Lindsay’s oblivious? Maybe between the alcohol, the drugs, and the fame she lost her social consciousness… according to E! News, the only reliable news source in my life (*sarcasm*), her NOH8 pic is enough of a social statement, which is worth as much or maybe more than, you know, knowing what’s going on.
Also, I have an article request. The Voice is concluding this week with a 50% chance of a lesbian winning. I’m just saying… maybe we can win something else too!
What I find weirder is you plotting out a timeline of her tweets to the gay news of the day.
Also you do understand that she isn’t a gay spokesperson? Or CNN? She just writes her reality. Take it or leave it. (In your case, I suggest you unfollow immediately but FIRST re-read her “GO NY” tweet to see that sometimes she does comment right on time to the gay issues YOU think are everything.)
This article has brought Autostraddle down to the same snarky level of the gossip sites.
Who approved this article anyway?
I disagree. I hate gossip, celebrity and otherwise. This article is one very intelligent person’s observation of Lindsay Lohan’s engagement with lgbtq issues. And uses that to ask a larger question:
“using your public platform as an out celebrity to recognize the monumental injustice and enormous levels of discrimination that your fellow queers are facing.” Is that too much to ask of a celebrity[?]
Lohan may not be a gay spokesperson, but she had no trouble using her same-sex relationship for every ounce of publicity it could generate. Her celebrity comes with a bully pulpit. She’s free to use it how she wants.
“gay issues YOU think are everything” Do you know you’re on a girl-on-girl culture site?
I’m glad Rachel wrote this and whoever approved it. Because if lots of eyeballs are going to read about celebrities, I’d rather it be because of their stand on civil rights than on what they wore last night or who they’re f*cking this week.
“This article has brought Autostraddle down to the same snarky level of the gossip sites.”
I don’t know if you’ve noticed (and I’m going to go with no, considering you seem surprised that an lgbt site is talking about lgbt stuff) but right up on the top of the page, the Autostraddle banner says “news, entertainment, opinion, and girl-on-girl culture”. This piece would definitely be considered the second, third, and fourth, if not the first, so where’s the problem? Entertainment + opinion =/= gossip.
Okay, and I just read my comment back and it looks way meaner than I meant it to be. I think the “the gay issues YOU think are everything” of your comment put me on the defensive, because, uh, dude, gay issues are pretty important? But yeah. Didn’t mean to be all “Do you even go here?”
You are right, she just writes her reality. I guess what I wish for her reality is for it to be a little bit less self encompassing (and be aware of the things an average, aware, and concerned citizen might).
But even beyond the fact that, in the public eye, she does represent the LGBTQ community (e.g., why she was referenced this morning on E! news alongside Neil Patrick Harris during their segment on NY marriage equality), and she is someone who has A VOICE. It would be fantastic if she would use it for something more meaningful from time to time and help educate and inspire her fans/followers rather than perpetuate bland nonsense and oblivion.
Huh? I don’t know if this is just bad research on Autostraddle’s part or what’s going on, but Lindsay tweeted a lot on the night the gay marriage bill was passed; she also blogged about Prop 8 back when that was happening a few years ago, and wrote another blog post about Sarah Palin being a homophobe too. Hell, even her twitter profile pic is from the NoH8 campaign… All of that in addition to, you know, being in a relationship with another woman for years, and openly acknowledging that.
Did they add her Twitter timeline where she said all those things after all these comments came through? Because um IT’S RIGHT THERE
it was mentioned in the initial post (as was the prop 8 blog reaction post aforementioned) and we also put those tweets in another post three days earlier,but everyone just seemed to skim this post and then yell, so we added them in to ensure that even people who didn’t read the words in the post would get it.
how did you guys make this mistake? lindsay tweeted about NY a ton when it happened.
It says this was posted by Rachel but I’m seeing a picture of Riese.
On the homepage it says Riese, the plot thickens.
it was written by rachel, i don’t know what the fuck is going on, something is broken on our website SURPRISE
We are sharing feelings!!! I want to share!!!! Pick me!!
Things I feel:
Glad that the writer expressed their opinion.
That their opinion does not reflect my own, but that is ok.
That I am in some ways glad that AS did not spend a lot of time weeding through LiLo’s twitter to find examples.
Grateful that I have internet access, and that AS exists.
Agreed on all accounts.
Also – I found a more interesting twitter to follow:
Hilarious, kinda mean, and possibly fake. Yet still more entertaining to me than Lilo’s life.
Hahaha incredible. “How to mail a pear.” Thank you for this.
omg “cream cheese jewish?”
YES!! “mother in french. m something something e”
hahah amazing. “oldest walter in america?” i’m having way too much fun reading this. thanks
I feel like this article is a joke that I don’t really understand.
why doesn’t everyone who’s so super-concerned about the degree to which rachel did or did not FACT CHECK A LINDSAY LOHAN STORY go read this amazing piece Gabby did about the murders in Puerto Rico of gay people, she spoke to someone there who gave us a really real perspective of how things are gong on the ground:
Okay… I think there’s a difference btwn people being like ‘who caaares’, which is fucking stupid, I agree, and others pointing out that the premise of the article appears to be incorrect. Rachel said Lilo didn’t comment on the vote, so I don’t really think it’s in-depth ‘fact checking’ or whatever to find that she actually did.
I’m just confused why the AS reaction wouldn’t be ‘oh yeah, oops’, instead of ‘well fuck aaalll y’all, why aren’t you commenting on this IMPORTANT article instead?”
actually (!), the point of rachel’s article here is that this event is more or less the first time since the prop 8 shit that lilo has commented on lgbtq politics in a timely fashion, including the tweet on 6.24, and that a surprising number of her subsequent tweets have been kinda gay, which is something we notice — gay lilo tweets.
oh jesus h.
thanks for clarifying the point of the article, it wasn’t crystal-clear, but now I get it.
I totally got the meaning when I read the article. I found it odd, that more pwople didn’t get it…
I do understand your point, I think … but like, we’re talking about Lindsay Lohan. Are there “facts” out there about Lindsay Lohan? I feel like 75% of what I read about Lindsay Lohan is made up, and like does anyone here know her and know what’s true or not? I guess don’t know/care about celebrity gossip so I don’t really understand ultimately what the contention is here, to be honest… maybe people are misreading? This article is about LiLo’s twitter feed, that’s it (and Aris explains the larger point pretty well up there) — Rachel says that LiLo did comment on the vote on twitter– that’s the topic of the article. I mean I posted LiLo’s tweets about the vote in this post over the weekend:
… I’d rather finish the equally inane Real L Word recap then try sorting through what’s true or not about Lindsay Lohan. Maybe I’m just not understanding specifically what’s left out here and Rachel is at work but I feel like she doesn’t know either
no, you’re right, i see now that she did include lindsay’s comments, so i misunderstood the intention of the article. i still think this is a weird commentary but whatevs.
… I’d rather finish the equally inane Real L Word recap then try sorting through what’s true or not about Lindsay Lohan…..”
whoa I think you just defined having to choose the lesser of two evils for all time. Godspeed, Riese.
girl you don’t even KNOW
Have faith and one day you will be free (of recapping duty). (And btw one day could be NOW as far as I’m concerned)
No malice intended towards Rachel but you may want to add this one :)
@dsaathoff oh and how do i miss New York too…. as well as your gorgeous (not on my team) face honey bear ;)
Posted on the night of June 24 when it passed.
i want to believe that the majority of our readers are a little more tuned in to our sense of humor / general feelings w/r/t lilo, celebrity gossip and real actual news than these comments would suggest.
you do realize that this is the same rachel who writes extensively about DADT, every single prop 8 update ever, presidential candidates, senate hearings, teen suicides, ENDA, DOMA and every other important topic relating to queer existence in america? and that this is the same website where you can also read about some really horrible, fucked up shit happening in puerto rico RIGHT NOW by clicking this link: http://www.autostraddle.com/18-murders-in-18-months-puerto-ricos-lgbtts-face-new-threats-old-politics-9576/
and that sometimes for fuck’s sake we just want to talk some silliness about lilo?
like, really? your head’s that far up your ass? go read the rest of the website. seriously. go.
I think the majority of readers are aware of the quality and quantity of writing Rachel does. I don’t mind if she posts a picture of the yellow pages and types “discuss” if she feels like doing so, or does a light post on Lilo. She (Rachel)is an integral part of this site and golden to a lot of readers.
YES. This :-)
murdered puerto ricans cannot compete with Lindsay Lohan.
that’s just the way it is.
but damn if i’m not all into Riese and Laneia getting militant.
Autostraddle on PMS… LOL! (and perhaps also some commenters as well ;) )
I feel like Lindsay Lohan’s tweets are a legitimate research topic. However, like some other commenters I do not agree with the research findings and think LiLo has tweeted enough support.
I believe your diagnosis is correct.
I think maybe everyone synced up or something…
Can we have a feature on our profile that calculates the number of days till our next period? That would provide us with important information.
I think that might be a GREAT idea.
This would be good, ’cause then there could be a week where it’s all just angry playlist sharing and cookie recipe swapping and kitten pictures and everything would be better.
Also-in defense of this article I think the commenting on obviously silly things being silly is silly and I totally read the article about Puerto Rico first and GODDAMN I appreciate the fact that I can peacefully and publicly discuss whether or not Lindsay Lohan is more gay or less gay on her twitter today or last week because I live in a very homosexual little corner of this country. Also run on sentence.
i really thought this was going to be about how 80% of her tweets are ads for great deals on designer boots or some shit. that’s bothering me way more than any of this.
this is a really good point
I am really okay with AS posting this article. Not that I spend a lot of my life thinking about LiLo, but as a celeb who is kind of on our team, updates now and again are fine by me.
Now I will go read the srs business Puerto Rico article and comment on that too.
Anything involving Twitter is probably something I don’t care about. I feel like that’s a good rule and I think I’ll keep following it. :)
‘like, really? your head’s that far up your ass? go read the rest of the website. seriously. go.”
Wow. Really? Not quite sure why the article was posted if the Autostraddle staff don’t want people to comment on it and “go read the rest of the website”.
No offense intended, have removed head from arse. :)
it’s only because she loves your head and your ass so much, as do I
thank you :) my arse feels very loved… so to speak!
I love it when Laneia gets like this it reminds me that she is..ugh what it is called, human :D
I wish we could all get along like we used to in middle school.. I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy.
she doesn’t even go here!
No…I just have a lot of feelings.
OK… go home.
I am so very happy that this turned to a Mean Girls reference thread.
Gosh, you’re so stupid, Karen!
What is UP with this comment thread? Because unless the article has changed substantially since the first fifty people commented, it’s a lighthearted article asking a substantive question about what Lilo does and doesn’t do with her MASSIVE media platform. If visibility is the thing that most affects the way other people see us and the way they make laws about us and react to us and ALL OF THAT STUFF, then it kind of is significant or at least mildly interesting what LiLo is doing with her MASSIVE MEDIA PLATFORM. That is, for better or for worse, why having out gay celebs matters; it’s why IMO Ellen has done huge amounts for increasing tolerance just by having a freaking daytime TV show while being gay. (And also, is it some weird and controversial idea that gay people care about famous gay people? What? You guys, I care about having people like me on my television screen. I watch Rachel Maddow and shows Sue Perkins does and I kept up with How I Met Your Mother long after it started irritating me because I like NPH is a cutie. I don’t think of myself as a real gossip hound or anything but gays in the media are interesting, ok?!)
and also some people just care about LiLo (me).
ugh you guys, I thought this article was a) pretty clear (LiLo tends not to tweet the stuff that gay people and allies all over the internet won’t shut up about, all of a sudden she did) and b) sort of interesting (what does it mean that a young celebrity who’s trying to recover her reputation doesn’t want to identify herself with the queer community? what does it mean that she felt that she could this time?) and c) fun.
Why do I think of breasts every time you say “MASSIVE MEDIA PLATFORM”?
Oh, yeah – because I’m a lesbian. That’s it.
She’s certainly got huge … numbers of followers.
Does that mean if I get a twitter I can see her MASSIVE MEDIA PLATFORM too?!
Sure! I see Lindsay’s MASSIVE MEDIA PLATFORM every day. :)
Yeah, agreed. I feel like I’m reading a different article…
Not sure if I agree with the premise, but I thought it was pretty well-defended.
Wow, some folks here need to chill out. I don’t care about celebrities myself but some people do and AS is a queer-culture website, so it’s great that they report on queer celebrities and provide information to this part of their readership. It’s not like they could be blamed of doing it at the expense of more important news, and not everyone can be all “SRS BSNS” all the time, it would be pretty depressing.
Now I’d like to say (in the most non-aggressive way) that something in this article bothered me : the assumption that because someone is out, they SHOULD be vocal about gay issues. None of us chose to be queer and some are just not activists at heart, and they have the most absolute right to live their lives however they want.
Saying “you’re gay so you MUST get involved in activism and politics” is as oppressive as “you’re gay so you MUST stay in the closet” imo, in both cases it’s telling them their sexual orientation should define their lives whether they want it or not.
I see that most of you stopped reading this piece about half way through. Before commenting on an article, I suggest asking yourself these questions:
1. Have I read the entire article in question? If so, have I made an attempt to understand the writer’s viewpoint?
2. Am I about to comment to say that the topic of the article is inane? Do I actually spend 100% of my time reading only about serious and important topics?
3. Does my comment make me look like a giant douche?
This. I was confused myself with the reactions/comments to this post, anyway, I will be passing this along to buddies who I feel jump into things too quickly.
The article has been edited after the comments. This shit is alive, don’t you think you can “read” and that’s it. It’s dynamic, like a movie or something…
I was given the impression from Riese and Laneia’s comments that the premise of the article now is the same as the premise of the article B.E.*
*Before Editing. I just made that up.
Yes, what’s in their heads didn’t change, but what we can see now conveys what’s in their heads to our heads in a much clearer way.
This. Namely number 3.
Did you ask yourself these questions, specifically #3?
Well and #1, quite frankly. Just saying.
I think the best thing would be for people to chill the fuck out. Name-calling, really? Authors of any kind have to expect a little criticism. It comes with the territory and if you aren’t prepared for that, don’t put your writing out there. But I don’t know if name-calling and attacks to either the author or commentators really accomplishes anything, excepting maybe #3 on your list.
And they say lesbians don’t have a sense of humor.
Oh my god you guys why is everyone so upset over this article? I mean it’s an interesting story. It reminds me of how after I came out to myself I started casually bringing up super queer shit all the time around other people, and then I’d wonder if they noticed. And it’s cool to think that maybe now, after New York, other public figures are going to start being more open about their sexuality and discussing gay topics candidly. If something has created a change within Lindsay Lohan and inspired her to embrace a part of herself that she didn’t before then I say “Cool dude.” And if you are ~above~ Lindsay Lohan-related news stories then don’t read them in the first place and then complain, DUMBY. HELLO MCFLY.
IA completely. I think it’s because this one is close to home for her as she’s from the state of NY. It’s a bit like how my parents were supportive yet also indifferent (if that makes sense) when it came to LGBT rights until I came out. It then became personal for them. Cause no one in either of their immediate families are LGBT (other than me, obvs) and it just so happens, the way their social circles are, that very few if any of their friends are (self-acknowledged at least) LGBT. I give her kudos for doing this. After all, this is the girl whose father publicly stated that he would not walk her down the aisle if she married a woman and is/was so openly homophobic toward her that he further said “she wouldn’t even think about asking”. Since when should a daughter have to ask? Ouch.
I kinda think that Lindsay’s probably not very plugged into the gay community; she may have dated Samantha, but does she have any gay friends/role models who aren’t club-hopping party kids? She may not follow the legal ups and downs of LGBT equality issues the way that those of us who are more immersed in the community do. I know non-celebrity young gays very like Lindsay who don’t really understand what the laws are that affect them. They would probably have similar twitter feeds – they’d react to New York but not have all the details on various other important issues.
I love Autostraddle and I don’t want to get the author of this article any trouble. That said, I don’t understand the point of this post. It is JUDGING. Why?
Who are you to judge Lindsay Lohan or whoever? She doesn’t owe you anything and, mostly, you don’t know her and the motivations for her actions. ……Maybe in the past she didn’t tweet about gay rights because she doesn’t like to focus on the negative. …..Or maybe because she was in so much shit of her own (dad issues, I read!?) that she couldn’t see outside her bubble. ……So many possibilities.
But mostly, WHY all this energy directed at JUDGING her? I don’t get it. And I really don’t want to criticize the author of this article in any way, I’m sure she’s very capable and has written lovely articles in the past, but I really don’t find this one interesting. At all.
There’s a difference between judging and analyzing. In this case, I personally think Rachel did a fine job of staying objective throughout that article.
Journalism isn’t a “thing” for everyone to like it. It’s a thing to be a thing. Or something.
Ok, thanks for input. But if a person’s goal is not to judge but to analyze, then they should be SCIENTIFIC about it. The organization of this article was not logical since it correlated Lindsay Lohan’s (personal) tweets to major equal rights events (oops, tricky) and then led to a hasty conclusion: “Is the fact that we finally, finally won a thing as opposed to being denied equality at every single turn enough to make her identify with us in some obtuse way?”
This logical is similar to: “if i walk down the road tomorrow I might be killed by a meteor”. Yes you can, but the changes of that happening are so slim and the probability that so many other things will kill you is much greater. So many things that, like, you can’t even begin to list them. And ultimately, who cares what does things are? Get my point?
……so that lead me to “WTF!?” followed by “Who cares?” followed by “I thought I was reading Autostraddle, not some blog by a second generation angry lesbian militant feminist or something” followed by “Argh,why did I even click this link?”
Yes, those second generation (?!) angry militant (?!) lesbian feminists (?!!!) just LOVE talkin’ about LiLo.
“The organization of this article was not logical since it correlated Lindsay Lohan’s (personal) tweets to major equal rights events (oops, tricky) and then led to a hasty conclusion: “Is the fact that we finally, finally won a thing as opposed to being denied equality at every single turn enough to make her identify with us in some obtuse way?””
Science, what does it mean?
– the fact that there is a question mark on the end of that sentence indicates that it’s not a conclusion but a suggestion, clearly throwing the floor open to people to discuss.
– When looking for patterns in the way an individual tweets about LGBT rights victories and losses, pretty much the only way you can do this is to look at the day of the victory and loss (and the time period around it) and see what they tweeted. That’s not exactly illogical. How else do you determine how someone tweets about these events? You could probably do a random sample of Lilo’s tweets (perhaps a thousand?) and investigate how many of them deal with LGBTQ issues, but if anything I imagine this would lead to less relevant data. You’re not interested in what she tweets about on a daily basis, you’re interested in what she tweets about when specific events have happened. The only way to find out about that is *to look at what she tweeted about when specific events happened.*
Your second paragraph is really confusing to me. um.
I know that my 2nd paragraph is totally confusing to you, since you obviously can’t comprehend metaphoric speech (got that from your first sentence). So I don’t even care to discuss with you.
Oh dear, but I’d so like to talk to you! Would you please, for little old me, explain what a “blog by a second generation angry lesbian militant feminist” is a metaphor for? Oh, go on, ignorant people like myself can only be ignorant until intelligent, well-spoken people like yourself explain your too-clever-for-mere-mortals-to-comprehend language!
awaiting with bated breath &c.
WELL. This whatever-generation-it-is-now over-educated militant feminist JUST THINKS LOHAN IS CUTE.
I like Lohan articles.
I like the political articles.
I LOVE Rachel’s writing (in whatever area).
If this was an article about something important that is therefore primarily meant to inform me I’d expect more accuracy/care with tone. However, this was a fun article (an a short one!) that I hope Rachel just threw together because it doesn’t need in depth analysis of ‘exactly what is being said here’….. because nothing much is being said!
I’m thinking some people on here should just MAKE OUT.
wait really? i feel like we’ve been nicer to lindsay lohan than any other website in the entire universe. like all of them. i think we’ve been nicer to lindsay lohan than anyone else, ever! and this is important to me, b/c i don’t think it’s our place to judge anyone, and that’s not what rachel is doing here.
AS HAS always been nice to Lohan. You are right, Riese. You guys also never trivialized Lohan’s coming out nor her queerness.I was at the L8 L Word convention earlier this yr and when talking about the I-have-these-shoes-giggly-sex, Kate French said “It was ironic cause when we were filming it LiLo wasn’t out yet”. And Angela Robinson was sitting five seats away on the stage. I was like, *In-Joke-that-probably-only-I-and-the-people-on-the-stage-in-this-room-fully-gets-due-to-knowledge-of-AR’s-previous-work-with-LL, soooo, yeah, um… AWKWARD*
But it also made me realize how long LiLo has been out now. More than three years.
She also said that Mia Kirshner used to draw smiley faces and faces with tongues out on her pasties or stick flowers on her pasties to prank her. “So, I’d go to undress her and…” HELLO :P ~Sorry I just had to write that somewhere on AS due to it being more proof of Mia Kirshner’s brilliance~
Next, can we analyze MC Hammer’s tweet history and search for themes?
i smell a guest post!
Ught-oh, ught-oh, here comes the Hammer!
Well I don’t know about anyone else but I’m still fascinated by everything LiLo does. I’m not being sarcastic; I still love her. I laughed out loud at that SYTYCD tweet on the day NY failed to achieve marriage equality– oh Lindsay, you so silly.
I think this article, apart from amusing me with the LiLo Twitter retrospective, actually does bring up some interesting questions about perspectives on sexuality and sexual politics. I think it’s fair to say (as other commenters on here have said) that Lindsay doesn’t seem to be very educated on queer issues or necessarily see herself as part of queer community in any way other than seeing beyond gender in her choice of partners. It’s strange because I’m the same age as Lindsay but it’s hard for me to understand her perspective– when I realized I was gay the first thing I wanted to do was read everything about it and figure out what it all meant. That being said, I know a number of other people who seem to have the same attitude as LiLo, who can incorporate same-gendered pairings into their lives without it apparently affecting their self-identification in the way it affected mine. That being said, we don’t actually know Lindsay, and there could be a number of other reasons why she would have wanted to distance herself publicly from LGBT identity, or why she would have felt uncomfortable discussing her changing self-identification with the world at large. And for that matter, why she apparently is embracing it more now.
yes i find it all really interesting as well. like i remember her myspace post about the issues when prop 8 happened (i think? i can’t remember the timing exactly) and it seemed like she had no idea about any of the politics behind this stuff until like that week.
i couldn’t really care less about her arrests or party dresses or jail time or rehab, but i am interested in her because as it has been said by The New York Times, she was the first mega-famous young starlette to come out at the peak of her career, which is kinda a big deal. anyhow.
“she was the first mega-famous young starlette to come out at the peak of her career, which is kinda a big deal.”
That’s a really, really good point. And somehow she managed to do that without becoming a spokesperson for LGBT anything. The whole thing has been kind of trivialized, and I wonder if that was purposeful on LiLo’s part (not wanting to make it about her identification with an orientation) or if it has more to do with people not taking Lindsay seriously in general.
She didn’t come out at the peak of her career though. Circa Mean Girls was the peak of her career. She was already done making movies and more famous for getting in trouble/paparazzi by the time she got together with Sam Ronson.
How about “at the peak of her media visibility”? I heard a lot more about La Lohan when she was having a fairly public meltdown than when she was starring in successful films (and I really enjoyed her early work & think that Parent Trap remake was pretty good, which is saying something considering the way I feel about the original).
Coming out at the peak of a career = probably pretty positive. Coming out at the peak of a public meltdown = uhhh. :/
LiLo’s Twitter: it’s a thing.
I, for one, totally get where you’re going with this article and appreciate your Lilo coverage. I don’t particularly follow gossip about her anymore, aside from seeing posts on Gawker noting her legal troubles, but a couple of years ago, I found the fact that she decided publicly date a (female!) tomboy DJ with bad hair and came close to being a living expose on the Hollywood bearding system absolutely fascinating. Even though Lindsay had always pinged for me and I’d read rumors about her long before she decided to go public, I was still rather surprised that she decided to be so open about dating Samantha Ronson.
Recently, she seems to be edging a bit more towards going back in the closet. I’m about 90% convinced that Lilo isn’t just bi, but is a lot more into ladies than guys, so I don’t think that the Samantha thing was just a fluke. But it’s some kind of commentary that this girl, who has so many other very public, incredibly negative PR issues finds it beyond the pale to talk about her sexuality in any great detail. She’s reluctantly said she’s bi, but seems to get incredibly uncomfortable in interviews if anyone questions her more in depth about her being queer/having same-sex attractions/etc. Apparently the stigma of being publicly acknowledged as a huge-fucking drug addict/alcoholic is manageable, and she gives interviews on that topic every other month, but admitting to straight-up liking girls will just ruin her!!! She occasionally tweets these things that are gay-related, or will strangely comment on other celebrities that seem to be closeted in a wink-wink, nudge-nudge sort of way (ahem, Ellen Page and Kristen Stewart), but that’s it. I guess I don’t really understand what she’s got to lose by being a bit more outspoken. She seems to have lost it all already. But maybe the stigma of being a young, queer/lesbian starlet in Hollywood is just that profound that she feels like she wouldn’t be able to maintain the semblance of fame she still currently has if she was more open?
This comment thread is a perfect example of people taking shit WAAAY too seriously. I mean, really. We’re talking about Twitter and Lindsay Lohan, people. C’mon.
I don’t know, I think the people in the thread feel that way about the post itself. I don’t want to speak for anyone, but I think it works both ways.
i love you, rachel. i understand this.
Don’t worry, guys. The silent majority gets this article, appreciates it, and doesn’t think like some of the commenters.
We are sane, enjoy pudding and ponies, and we like you and love the content of the site, both entertainment and news.
evan rachel wood bisexual?