Gay Marriage | John Barrowman | News | Scotland | Wales

Scottish-American Actor John Barrowman in Civil Partnership

Barrowman_1Scottish-American actor John Barrowman tied the knot with Scott Gill, his partner of 16 years, in a civil partnership ceremony yesterday St David's Hotel and Spa in Cardiff Bay, Wales. Approximately forty friends and family witnessed the event, according to reports.

Barrowman stars as Captain Jack Harkness in the BBC Doctor Who spin-off Torchwood.

There was no comment from the couple, but Barrowman has commented previously on his intention to have his relationship legally recognized: "Our relationship was legitimate for us a long time ago. We have been spending most of our time together. The ceremony is because we have the right to be recognised as a couple. It forces people who don’t want to recognise same-sex relationships as legitimate, it forces them to do so."

Barrowman wore a kilt to the ceremony in honor of his Scottish roots. Although raised in Joliet, Illinois, he was born in Glasgow.

Best wishes to the happy couple.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I've been crushed out on him since his "Central Park West" days. Sad he's taken, happy that he lives in a country that recognizes his relationship.
    All Headline had some quotes from him:
    http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7005972967

    Posted by: jeremy | Dec 28, 2006 10:22:39 AM


  2. I fell in love (lust?) with John Barrowman after seeing him in DeLovely. He has torched my wood many times.

    Posted by: sam | Dec 28, 2006 10:27:02 AM


  3. Okay, so I was like 12 when Central Park West aired- and he was perhaps my first gay crush (him or Marky Mark) which meant I jerked off to Mr. Barrowman 10 times a day.

    It's fantastic to see an out-actor get married.

    Posted by: HUGH | Dec 28, 2006 10:48:19 AM


  4. 16 year relationship? there were rumors of john's insatiable sexual appetite a few years back, then he's been cheating on his partner for quite awhile now.

    Posted by: w | Dec 28, 2006 12:24:44 PM


  5. W, I'm so happy you're here to repeat rumours and jump to conclusions.

    Posted by: Daniel | Dec 28, 2006 12:44:34 PM


  6. He was in Central Park West!? I too was younger so I barely remember that show but I remember that girl from Matrix was in it. I fell in love with John when a friend of mine was shocked at my admission I'd never heard Carol Burnett sing so he played this DVD he had called "Putting Things Together" (I think that's it) and I was like "Who's that hot man!?" hehe

    Posted by: Derrick | Dec 28, 2006 1:03:56 PM


  7. I hear he has a man sized manicotti.

    Posted by: gay is the new straight | Dec 28, 2006 1:20:10 PM


  8. Who cares if he has an open relationship or not. I think the ones who make a big deal out of that fact are usually the ones who have never had a successful relationship. 16 years of togetherness for anyone in the gay community (open/closed) is a record that should be celebrated.

    Posted by: Ogden | Dec 28, 2006 1:30:49 PM


  9. Next up: acting lessons.

    Posted by: Anon | Dec 28, 2006 1:43:03 PM


  10. It's not natural to have a monogomous relationship. People aren't built that way. That's a bunch of religious crap that is meant to keep people in line.

    I think everyone needs to figure out what does/doesn't work for them. For some, that might mean a closed relationship. For others, it may mean shared experiences. Still others, it may mean don't ask, don't tell.

    Who cares? If we stop pointing fingers and started supporting each other we'd be a healthier community. Oh, wear condoms.

    Posted by: Brady | Dec 28, 2006 1:43:45 PM


  11. Brady i disagree with you on the mongamy issue and not from a religous perspective...i am 100% a hater of religion/atheist ...

    BUT (not saying all humans are cut out for mongamy) monogamy is found in nature amongst many different species....fish, fowl, and mamal

    Coyotes are 100% monogamous till death
    swans, ravens, etc all 100% monogamous

    Monogamy is NOT unnatural otheriwse it would not be found in Nature

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Dec 28, 2006 2:07:18 PM


  12. I think different couples have different ways of working--or not working. It's as stupid to pass judgment on others for having a monogomous relationship as it is to judge them for having an open relationship. If it works for them it's nobody else's business.

    Posted by: Daniel | Dec 28, 2006 2:17:17 PM


  13. Lots of pictures of folks arriving for the ceremony: http://tinyurl.com/y54gcu

    and his partner is nice looking too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6212729.stm

    Posted by: AMS | Dec 28, 2006 2:18:49 PM


  14. Why for some reason I must have had Gill confused with an older British architect. I though Scott Gill was an older man, but he's a hottie.

    Posted by: Ted B. (Charging Rhino) | Dec 28, 2006 3:57:45 PM


  15. Yes Jimmyboyo, but none of the primates, which we are most closely related to, are monogamous. We aren't merely animals and we have free will, so many can and should choose monogamy. But for those who choose not to, it's their choice and there is a correlation with our ape cousins.

    I agree with Brady. It's not for everyone. Just as monogamous individuals should not speak for anyone other than themselves and their prospective partners, men who choose to be in open relationships should not say that it's ok for everyone.

    Posted by: mark m | Dec 28, 2006 6:51:23 PM


  16. Congrats to them both - envious how some guys look cool in a kilt!

    There seems to be some critique about John's 'dalliances' as if marriage and monogamy are compulsory... or should be. Really? Since when did we start proscribing the rules for successful gay marriages? That's getting close to compulsory heterosexuality you know.

    Good luck to the happy couple I say.

    Posted by: Sean R | Dec 28, 2006 7:31:53 PM


  17. Mark M

    The arboreal primates, e.g. lesser apes and marmosets, are often monogamous and provide an additional source of context for human pair-bonding.

    My original response was on the whole "un-natural" schtick. If something occurs in nature even once it means it is impossible to refer to that thing as un-natural. for example xtians saying we gays are unnatural is totaly bull since it is abundant in nature and anything in nature is natural and can not be unnatural

    That said. I personaly can not understand non-monagomous relationships. Totaly as an atheist/ naturalist with no religous hang ups at all. I myself would rather not be in a relationship at all than be in an open relationship. I refuse to setle. I refuse to have someone there just to have someone there. Fucking around with different guys is cool...been there/ done that, but never while in a relationship.

    Psychological studies have shown that open relationships het/homo lack in serious intimacy the likes of which only mongamy can produce. From personal experience all open relationship couples I have met are unhappy with one member especialy unhappy.

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Dec 28, 2006 11:59:39 PM


  18. PS

    The arborial primates are the ones we are descended from. the apes and monkeys are our cousins descended from a common ancestor an arborial primate

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Dec 29, 2006 12:02:56 AM


  19. That dress makes him look fat

    Posted by: steve | Dec 29, 2006 5:27:13 AM


  20. Jimmyboyo,

    I agree with you on the subject of unnatural issues. We are not simply observers of nature. We ARE nature, so anything human is also part of nature.

    A distinction on the arboreal primtes is that humans and chimps evolved from the same arboreal ancestor and through 6 million years of evolution, our two branches followed each other closely. So much so that we share 95% of the same DNA. So while it may be true that some arboreal primates of today are monogamous, there is no scientific evidence that the arboreal primates of our family tree were also monogamous. And our closest relatives today are not.

    That's not to undermine the importance of monogamy. You are correct that lack of monogamy can damage the intimacy of a relationship, but it can also act as a sexual release for couples to allow them the freedom to have other partners, thus strengthening the bond with their life partner.

    This may be something you cannot identify with and you are entitled to that. You should never settle. You deserve the kind of relationship you want in life. Just don't judge others who have found happiness in relationships that are not monogamous.

    For every couple you can name who are non monogamous and unhappy I can show you one that is monogamous and unhappy or they are lying to their partners about what they do on the side.

    No one view is the best one, except what you choose for yourself.

    Posted by: mark m | Dec 29, 2006 8:51:25 AM


  21. Mark M

    :-)

    you know, when i typed in the part about open couples and unhappy.....after sending it I even thought ...Yeah, i also know a ton of unhappy monogamous couples. Heck unhappyness seems to be part of the human condition het or homo. :-)

    Whatever works for whomever.

    The unnatural thing gets me. LOL Like you said, we as humans are part of nature and if we do it then of course it is natural. :-)

    Steve, it is a kilt!!!!!!!!! Not a dress.....the scots-irish in me feels like throwing a thing of hagas (spell check) at ya (hagas being the national dish made from sheep stomach stuffed with minced kidney , heart, etc...Yuck)


    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Dec 29, 2006 10:02:39 AM


  22. Hagas? Didn't he direct "Crash"?

    Haggis.

    Posted by: Anon | Dec 29, 2006 11:34:44 AM


  23. Jimmyboyo, you know even when we have differing opinions, I got nothing but love for ya!

    :)

    Posted by: mark m | Dec 29, 2006 1:50:27 PM


  24. mark M

    ;-)

    and we 2 sci-fi geeks didn't even discuss Captain jack :-) I hope BBC america or sci-fi will carry Torchwood, I liked his character on Dr Who.

    Anon, thanks for the spelling correction on Haggis

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Dec 29, 2006 5:01:29 PM


  25. He's been at the top of my list for at least a half-dozen years, not just because he's gay, talented, stunning to look at with a voice that angels could envy, but because he's Yankee born and wears kilts. Shallow, to be sure. But who knows the way the heart works? Congratulations to the happy couple.

    Posted by: Jimbeau | Jan 7, 2007 3:00:16 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Massachusetts High Court Won't Force a Vote on Gay Marriage« «