The Pop Corporation

Right now, we’ve never had so many gay and queer people in the world. Think of the past – it was outlawed, then we had people dying of AIDS, and rampant homophobia saw that when gay people weren’t hiding, they were dying. Society has progressed however, and now we’re afforded the beautiful site of openly gay older people, and swathes of younger people can express their sexuality and gender however they see fit.

It’s not without people hitting out at them, being stick-in-the-muds, and all that negativity and bullshit that just won’t die, but the fact is, is that we’re living in a very queer time, and that’s clearly a good thing.

However, there’s problems on the correct side of history too, as people foist imagined queerness on people, accusing them of queerbaiting or not being brave enough to come out, when sometimes, these things are entirely speculation.

So, to Taylor Swift, who people are determined to be queer, by hook or by crook.

Fans of Swift’s have long speculated about her sexuality, which is pretty crass, but y’know, that’s what young people do and you can’t hold them too accountable, even if it does give you a dose of the ick. But the New York Times? Come on lads.

Remarkably, they’ve shat out a 5,000-word opinion piece called Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do, and editor Anna Marks listed exactly all the ways Taylor has put out coded references to the LGBTQ+ community, because clearly, she must be a bit gay or something.

Obviously, this is making waves because Taylor Swift is just about the most successful popstar on the planet right now, but let’s assume Taylor Swift isn’t out yet – is outing her in a newspaper a good thing? Have we learned nothing from the media’s transgressions of the past? It’s not okay to do it with young men in the public eye, just as it’s not okay to do it with Taylor Swift.

Anonymously, someone close to Swift has been quoted as saying: “There seems to be no boundary some journalists won’t cross when writing about Taylor, regardless of how invasive, untrue, and inappropriate it is – all under the protective veil of an ‘opinion piece’.”

No matter though, because Anna Marks saw fit to write: “In isolation, a single dropped hairpin is perhaps meaningless or accidental, but considered together, they’re the unfurling of a ballerina bun after a long performance. Those dropped hairpins began to appear in Ms Swift’s artistry long before queer identity was undeniably marketable to mainstream America. They suggest to queer people that she is one of us.”

Eh?

Of course, Swift is an ally and to her LGBTQ+ fans, she’s said explicitly that her shows are a safe space for them. As they should be. That’s pretty basic shit, isn’t it? And that’s not to criticise Swift – it’s great that she’s stating the obvious, because sometime, you need to do exactly that. It pisses off the right people, and it lets people know you’re cool like that. She’s also hit out at anti-gay bills that have been introduced in the States, because that’s the correct thing to do.

And big-brained, she said: “Rights are being stripped from basically everyone who isn’t a straight white cisgender male,” she said. “I didn’t realise until recently that I could advocate for a community that I’m not a part of.”

Not. A. Part. Of.

You’d need the smoothest of brains to think that someone couldn’t be as straight as they come and absolutely stick up for people who feel marginalised. You have to say that Swift has been very tasteful with it, never once trying to be anything less than the woman she is, but still offering up rallying cries for those who need it.

It’s just garbage behaviour, even if people constantly speculate about these things on the sofa and down the pub.

Marks has said something about the whole thing: “I know that discussing the potential of a star’s queerness before a formal declaration of identity feels, to some, too salacious and gossip-fueled to be worthy of discussion.”

“I share many of these reservations. But the stories that dominate our collective imagination shape what our culture permits artists and their audiences to say and be. Every time an artist signals queerness and that transmission falls on deaf ears, that signal dies. Recognising the possibility of queerness – while being conscious of the difference between possibility and certainty – keeps that signal alive.”

Or, she might just be a straight person who isn’t a dick to her gay pals, right?