06/30/2008
"I'm Like The Boy Next Door, But Just A Little Bit Off"
So says Fall Out Boy's Pete Wentz, who takes on the gay cause—despite not being gay himself—in a new Out (August 2008) cover story:
"When I'm going down the street, I get called a fag all the time. We have iPhones, and I'm still getting called the same names as when I was 13."
In a candid interview in which he likens himself to Andy Warhol and says no one has ever had to come out to him since his openness is well known, Wentz lobbies hard to be seen as not only a gay ally, but a fellow queer.
Just one who happens to have sex with Ashlee Simpson.
"'People treat sexuality the same way that [during] Jim Crow [white] people treated African-Americans,' he tells me. 'It’s totally dehumanized.' It could be his view from the stage—Fall Out Boy audiences skew toward teenage girls, and dudes who like mosh pits and teenage girls—but Wentz shrugs off the idea that whatever bias remains will survive another generation. 'The actual acceptance of gay marriage is inevitable,' he says. 'It’s just like how the next generation of kids are going to all have tattoos.'"
Thnks fr th spprt!
More images AFTER THE JUMP.
Posted 1:30 PM EST by Andy in Magazines, Pete Wentz, Shirtless | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Uh....great?
Posted by: JD | Jun 30, 2008 1:42:23 PM
Being sexually open and fag-friendly doesn't make him any less of a douchey attention whore. Faux bisexuality + eyeliner doesn't = cool. It's still Pete Wentz we're talking about.
Posted by: Chas | Jun 30, 2008 1:52:46 PM
Real live gays and lesbains everywhere you look. So who does "Out" put on its covers? Straights. That's their ideal. That's their agenda -- making the world safe for straight people.
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jun 30, 2008 1:54:46 PM
Any bets that Tila Tequila makes the September cover?
http://www.towleroad.com/2008/06/post-1.html
Posted by: John in Manhattan | Jun 30, 2008 2:16:46 PM
pete wentz is so, so sexy. he makes me feel like a 14 year old girl!
Posted by: David | Jun 30, 2008 2:26:48 PM
The title reminded me of this awesome song:
Anyway, I like Pete Wentz, camera-whoring and all. He's right that homophobia also targets less masculine straight men.
Posted by: thin mint | Jun 30, 2008 2:27:39 PM
My link got erased in the comment above. Boo to no links! Oh well.
Anyway, to make sense of the comment, the link was to Broken Social Scene's song "I'm Still Your Fag" on Youtube.
Posted by: thin mint | Jun 30, 2008 2:29:40 PM
I've met Pete a few times at music events and he has been genuine and very fun to talk to. Call him what you like, I'm glad that he's raising exposure of basic human rights for gays to his fan base.
Honestly, guys, keep criticizing gay friendly celebrities and see how many more will step up to the plate.
Posted by: mark | Jun 30, 2008 2:35:08 PM
Any other gay magazines worth reading since Out has for lack of a better term, sold out? The Advocate is cool, news heavy, but maybe something with more pop cultural appeal. Am I gonna have to just go through blogs?
Posted by: Derrick | Jun 30, 2008 2:37:04 PM
Ugh, I'm so sick of him. Get him out of my sight.
Posted by: Gregoire | Jun 30, 2008 2:45:17 PM
Mark, you hit the nail on the head; keep criticizing gay friendly celebrities and see how many more will step up to the plate. BFD, so Wentz wants to play coy. Love him for it.
I like 'Out' magazine, and will continue to subscribe to it. It's a gay(er) GQ or Details. It's fun, and I think Peter Wentz is still cute.
For self-loathing gay dreck, please subscribe to Genre.
Posted by: Rad | Jun 30, 2008 2:47:02 PM
Honestly don't give a shit how many "gay friendly celebrities step up to the plate."
I want actual gays and lesbians. Is that too much to ask for?
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jun 30, 2008 2:47:18 PM
This is interesting. If you follow the link to the whole interview at OUT, in the first paragraph:
"Wentz ... asks if him being in Out is akin to the Beastie Boys doing Vibe. 'Will you get flak for having someone like me on the cover?' he asks, sounding more concerned for the magazine’s reputation than his own."
Yes, Pete, apparently they will!
Posted by: thin mint | Jun 30, 2008 2:57:59 PM
I have to agree with D.E. here. Maybe it's time we stopped spending so much time pining over straight celebrities who claim to embrace and start shining the light on our own. Personally, I don't rest easier at night knowing that Pete Wentz kisses boys, that Sharon Stone has a ton of gay friends, or that Jake Gyllenhaal wouldn't be ashamed if he were gay. That's nice and all, but so the fuck what.
All of that being said, 'OUT' is schmaltzy lifestyle magazine in the same vein as 'Details', 'GQ', and 'Cosmopolitan'. I don't expect them to be substantive in the subjects they cover. Expecting any different would be giving them too much credit.
Posted by: Chas | Jun 30, 2008 3:03:29 PM
I could swear there was a time when we embraced straight allies.
What a bunch of douchebags; Wentz embraces us, and most of you just whine that we're not talking about gay celebs. Well guess what: straight allies are good, and deserve our support.
Posted by: Dan E | Jun 30, 2008 3:05:04 PM
This mag gets covered in the blog so much and the same thing every time. . . I'm with David.
Out is obviously for straight people! I couldn't figure it for the longest time. Then suddenly it hit me!
Out is for when you come out of the straight closet! They finally have a magazine and we just always thought it was for us. Wow.
My life has one less puzzle.
Posted by: Br!on | Jun 30, 2008 3:06:14 PM
THIN MINT, I love that even HE gets it.
The honchos at 'OUT' are well aware that a lot of gays think they have "straight worshiping" tendencies. They just don't care. I remember reading the letter from the editor section in one issue a couple years ago where the guy literally answered the criticism with a "Yawn". Their main objective is to SELL, and if they can do that by throwing gay celebs and activists under the bus in favor of straight ones, they'll continue to do so.
Posted by: Chas | Jun 30, 2008 3:14:55 PM
re: David E,
Let me get this straight (no pun) -- you're saying that you don't want outsiders speaking out about equal rights for gays just because they're not gay? Do you also believe that the opinions of PETA members should be dismissed because they're not animals?
Posted by: Mark | Jun 30, 2008 3:20:05 PM
If you don't like it don't read it. I cannot see how it can be hurtful to LGBT rights to have a high profile gay friendly celeb tooting the horn for us. If having someone like Wentz on the cover results in a straight person reading the magazine and becoming more gay-friendly, then that's a victory. We will only will by fighting for one straight heart at a time.
Posted by: Ted | Jun 30, 2008 3:20:35 PM
Jesus, you are some bitter bitches. Magazines need to sell. Newsstand sales are largely based on their covers---meaning, someone famous.
Instead of attacking all the straight people willing to be on those covers, why not attack closeted gays? Because the list of famous gays who are going to sell magazines is still pitifully short.
Out sucks in tons of ways (mainly the insanely priced fashions and other "living" products beyond the reach of most mortals). But having a gay-friendly cover guy is just common sense in terms of selling magazines. If you have a list of several dozen well-known, eye-grabbing out celebritries willing to adorn the cover of Out, I'm sure that the magazine's editors would be happy to have it.
Posted by: Paul R | Jun 30, 2008 3:21:17 PM
Mark,
Just FYI: You're trying to make a logical argument with someone who doesn't like Brokeback Mountain because none of the 4 main actors are gay.
Good luck with that!
Posted by: crispy | Jun 30, 2008 3:27:39 PM
Yeah, DAN E, straight allies are great. I love my straight friends like family. But I think there's a danger in acting as if we're somehow validated or actualized via straight acceptance. Like the old saying goes, you have to love yourself and accept your own before anyone else can.
Posted by: Chas | Jun 30, 2008 3:28:51 PM
After reading the comments, I think there is no pleasing someone. I would bet if they put a gay celeb on the cover, the first comment here would be "*Yawn*, so he's gay and on TV. Is that supposed to make me care."
I am beginning to think the real issue is that people are just jealous that it is not them on the cover.
Posted by: Ed | Jun 30, 2008 3:49:19 PM
BTW, my main issue with this cover isn't that they put a straight celebrity on the cover. Like I said, I haven't expected anything different from 'OUT' in a long time. I just don't like Pete Wentz, lol. I make fun of him wherever I see him, not just here on Towleroad.
Posted by: Chas | Jun 30, 2008 3:58:02 PM
ED: nah, it's just that no matter WHAT story Towleroad covers, the first 1 or 2 posts are always "And I should care because..." or "So what" or some other bitchy shit. So I say boo to the haters who lurk here, and love: LOVE Towleroad, LOVE Pete Wentz (and don't forget, there are many kids killed every year because people *think* they are gay, so good on him!), even LOVE Out! More of anything positive and pro-gay is good.
Posted by: Strepsi | Jun 30, 2008 3:59:22 PM
Oh Christ, he's an opportunistic modestly talented attention whore, but many of you have decided to lift him above your heads because he likes gay people. How pathetic is that? Its the 21st Century here, not 1982.
Posted by: Gregoire | Jun 30, 2008 4:04:21 PM
Magazines are essentially dying. Their costs are enormous and advertising requires the most generic, lowest common denominator approach to attract the most eyeballs. $4 gas will probably help kill them off. Enough teenage girls think Wentz is cute to put him on magazine covers. The problem is then that they don't buy the stuff being advertised. Advertisers don't like that and pull ads. It's a no-win situation. Their aren't enough gay men to sell pamphlets.
Posted by: anon | Jun 30, 2008 4:23:20 PM
Bitter bitches is right!
Sorry, I missed the day we won the culture war and we stopped needing straight allies.
Out is a mag for "self-hating" gays because they have straight people on their cover? That seems backwards to me. If we fight to be exclusive in who can join our "Rights" movement, how far have we really come?
Yes, I want straight families at our Parades. Yes, I want straight allies on our magazines. Yes, I want transgendered people included in ENDA, or no ENDA at all.
How self-hating is exclusivity?
Posted by: JeffRob | Jun 30, 2008 4:53:33 PM
Out is completely irresponsible for using the "f-word" on its cover. This is a word gay people (including the editors of Out) should abandon. I don't think that Andy Towle uses it in his writings on this blog, and that's the right approach: mature, grown-up, intelligent. In their desperation to seem cool and edgy, the editors of Out are just being jerks and perpetuating a word that has hurt too many people. A magazine cover doesn't allow enough space for the nuance of the use of the word to be explained. The fewer words you use, the more carefully you should choose them. I've never subscribed to Out, and certainly won't now. I guess mine are one pair of "affluent gay eyeballs" their advertisers won't reach.
Posted by: Wil | Jun 30, 2008 4:55:33 PM
"Month after month, gay magazine after gay magazine, all have straight people on the covers"
Out magazine recently had John Barrowman, Greg Berlanti, Tom Ford, and Marc Jacobs on its covers. So that pretty much blows that theory. I guess we'll just go ahead and ignore the rest of your silly, over-dramatic comment.
Posted by: crispy | Jun 30, 2008 5:02:05 PM
Sorry Evan, but I don't think you get what I'm saying. I believe that the more people that stand for fighting injustice, the better; and no one person's voice is more or less valuable because of their orientation. And when celebs speak out it raises the profile.
My fourth grade teacher was Jeanne Manfred, founder of PFLAG. Who marched alongside her gay son in the 1972 gay pride parade. I learned from her that if you feel strongly about a cause then you must speak out. That, and logarithms.
Posted by: mark | Jun 30, 2008 5:08:16 PM
Go back to your Cremes, Crispy. Putting John Barrown and Greg Berlanti on the cover is great. Publisexuals like Tom Ford and Marc Jacobs should be banned from the covers of ALL publications.
"Out" should have NOTHING but out lbgt people on its covers. No one else. No excuses!
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jun 30, 2008 5:30:35 PM
It is precisely because GLBT folks have been forced into silence for so long that we now should never take for granted any of our straight allies.
Without them, coming out is our only weapon. With them, we have a whole new arsenal.
Why in the world harbor animosity for anyone fighting for us, especially when they're not one of us?
It isn't about them validating us. As David E. once scolded me for saying here, save yourselves, people. YOU make you equal, not them.
Let's work on our own self-actualization, as individuals and a community, AND welcome non-glbt allies in every way we can, all at the same time. Surely that's not too difficult...
Posted by: JeffRob | Jun 30, 2008 5:41:49 PM
Re:Gregoire
It's funny, because the only reason I ever heard of Pete Wentz is because some member of a band I had never heard of before (and still don't know any of their music) showed his dick on the internet, started dating and eventually knocked up "Jessica Simpson's Sister" (now THERE'S a claim to fame) and kissed a boy (but really didn't like it)?
Ummm... Six Degrees of Separation, anyone? It's great that the boy likes boys who like boys (as long as all those boys know he doesn't like boys) but for crying out loud... wouldn't it be GREAT if Out could find someone who REALLY loves us without feeling the need to denounce us or distance himself from us in the same breath?
It's not a criticism of Pete, but of Out.
What's next, the boys of Gossip Girl expressing their adoration for all their gay fans and telling them to "Get over it"? "Move along, nothing to see here... but as long as we're getting paid to be on the cover, may as well make it look good (and untouchable)."
Posted by: MikeinSanJose | Jun 30, 2008 6:38:02 PM
Tommy Haas is hot but u should have gotten pictures of another German tennis player, Nicolas Keifer, who also lost this weekend. He went commando during the match & it was apparent cuz u have to wear white at Wimbledon.
Posted by: scar2 | Jun 30, 2008 6:44:52 PM
Evan, I have to disagree with you again: "It's too bad that we have all these mouthy self-hating gay people who worship straights and only want validation from straights."
As gay men, we're accustomed to people hating us based on THEIR prejudice, (not our insecurities or self loathing). When confronted with a stranger that treats us with the respect and dignity any human being deserves, it's sad to be suspicious and question their motivations. Your hostility towards straights and well adjusted gay men is troubling.
Posted by: Mark | Jun 30, 2008 7:01:07 PM
"Go back to your Cremes, Crispy"
Clever. In case there was any doubt why you're a two-bit freelancer and not the editor of Out or any magazine for that matter, I think you just made it clear.
Posted by: crispy | Jun 30, 2008 7:51:39 PM
I love our straight supporters and all that, but what's with OUT magazine anyway? Do they EVER feature anybody on their cover who is actually, uh, OUT? What's with that?
Posted by: John | Jun 30, 2008 8:16:26 PM
Well, I believe the members of PETA should be dismissed, whether animals or not. Incidentally, the members of PETA are animals.
Posted by: Eric Seguy | Jun 30, 2008 8:54:58 PM
Someone besides the creators of OUT Magazine still reads and/or talks about OUT Magazine? Wow. People sure do seem to expect an awful lot of political responsibility and actual content out of a magazine that thinks Gay Pride consists of purchasing $75 hair care product and $400 pants. Also: Pete Wentz will say absolutely anything he needs to sell more fucking records and get more press, wake the hell up. Whether or not he makes these kinds of statements to the press (and every generation's gotta have it's "I might've kissed a boy once" provocateur, be it Bowie, Brett Anderson (Suede), Pete or otherwise), I don't see him doing much else about supporting gays or truly contributing to the "cause" besides just yapping about it in some sensationalistic, press-baiting kinda bullshit way. If this is what passes for "support" from the straights in OUT's eyes, I'll pass, thanks.
Posted by: Dave | Jun 30, 2008 9:53:16 PM
Dave, I thin it's sufficient that he makes clear that being a homo is of no concern. Any teenager reading Out, gay or straight, will benefit from that. And him being on the cover of the magazine makes it more likely that they'll see and read it.
I've never heard a single song he's sung, yet I've seen plenty of promo on his gay-friendliness.
If the complainers on this post were the editors of Out, and needed to sell magazines, who would you put on the front? A straight, gay-friendly, major rock star? Or a gay, barely known "performer"? The influence of either is highly debateable. And it seems like neither would please you. Does anything?
Get real.
Posted by: Paul R | Jun 30, 2008 11:29:22 PM
Call me jaded or elitist or exclusionary or whatever, but I still think character counts for something. I've never been willing to accept "gay positivity" at face value. I consider the source. If it comes from someone I like and respect and they're being genuine about it, I'm overjoyed to hear/read it. If it comes from a celebrity who just happens to be promoting their new project or just themselves, I take it with a huge grain of salt. See, I DON'T CARE that someone like Pete Wentz doesn't hate gay people. He's someone I neither like nor respect, so his opinion on gay issues holds no weight with me one way or the other. Some of YOU might think you have to take "acceptance" wherever you can get it, but I hold myself in much higher regard.
Remember when some genius in charge of LA Pride thought it would be a FABULOUS idea to appoint Paris Hilton grand marshal of the Parade? Remember HER 'OUT' cover story where they proclaimed her the "new Jean Harlow"? She's a detestable brat who'd done jack shit to promote gay rights or support gay charities and she thinks two people of the same gender kissing is "gross", but she's, like totally famous and hawt, so, like, she should totally be given the top honor at an event that's supposed to be making a statement about civil rights and equality. What-the-fuck-ever. THAT kind of mindless, shallow bullshit does NOTHING to help anyone who needs it. NOTHING.
Anyone who's life is reaffirmed by shallow publicity stunts has more to work on than just gay self-acceptance. Like self-respect, dignity, and general self-worth for a start.
Posted by: Chas | Jul 1, 2008 1:20:18 AM
I don't enjoy Fallout Boy's music, but at least Pete Wentz can play an instrument - that's a job skill.
Was Paris Hilton really Pride marshal? Was there a boycott? Good lord, L.A. is horrible.
Posted by: thin mint | Jul 1, 2008 1:48:49 AM
Yes, THIN MINT, she fucking was. I think it was in 2006. In a town full of campy, genuinely gay-friendly characters Paris "Two Niggers" "Public School Bitches" Hilton was the best they could do that year. It was the first in a series of events that forced me to realize some gays care more about money, fame and status than anything truly important.
Speaking of which, I just remembered reading another 'OUT' 'Letter from the Editor' where the tool said he "understood" how "our" rich friends could repeatedly vote for anti-gay Republican Presidents like Reagan and Bush for purely financial reasons. Basically, he said it was OK to throw your gay friends under the bus in favor of maintaining your abundant wealth. Ya know, because money's all that REALLY matters in the end. "We understand". Who needs respect and equality when you've got dough, right? I've refused to even touch another issue since then.
Posted by: Chas | Jul 1, 2008 3:15:07 AM
In reference to the number of comments on this post compared to others (exempli gratia the post on DADT):
Is Pete Wentz’s doughy ass on the cover of a magazine really the most pressing issue facing the LGBT community?
Get a life people.
Posted by: Confused | Jul 1, 2008 8:36:36 AM
What I find interesting in some of the comments above; is that we are starting to sound like angry gay men? I guess we will begin taking the place of the stereotypical angry black man or woman in the media? Now we will have the new image of the angry gay man. He hates straights and eventually will turn on his own kind when they come out; i.e. the cattiness towards, Lance Bass or NPH. Progress is great!
Posted by: Mike | Jul 1, 2008 10:10:28 AM
MIKE: The "angry black man" stereotype is used by bigots in an attempt to silence legitimate dissent regarding race. The "angry gay man" stereotype you seem to be pushing will serve the same purpose RE: gay rights. Darkies and perverts should just shut up and accept whatever scraps are thrown their way, right? I think not.
Posted by: Chas | Jul 1, 2008 3:22:09 PM