Apple's Tim Cook profiled as "most powerful gay man in Silicon Valley"

1246717

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 335
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by diamondgeeza View Post


    aardvark fancier ...



    That would be Michael Dell.
  • Reply 62 of 335
    franckfranck Posts: 135member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solsun View Post


    Well I'm a gay man, and no, I'm not offended by the headline, but yes, it is a silly story... Of course Tim Cook is gay. who cares? and furthermore, did anyone really not know that already?



    ..





    I surely didn't?but I don't care.
  • Reply 63 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    Seriously. This is gossip. And AI is reporting on gossip. Especially something as fiercely personal as this. I'd say it was an inappropriate and irresponsible choice to publish this



    I couldn't have said it better myself. AI should be ashamed of themselves for stooping to this new low .... but you know they won't be.
  • Reply 64 of 335
    If this was a story about the most powerful minority or female CEO in the US, everyone would be proud that Apple was getting this attention. (How many stories did we hear about Carly Fiorina when she took over at HP?)



    This is why this story is powerful and needed, especially to many young gay kids who need good role models. Seeing one of the most successful companies have a gay man treated as an equal by Steve Jobs and the rest of the executive team is a powerful message. It also continues to breakdown stereotypes.



    My only hope is he is out and this didn't 'out' him to the world against his wishes.
  • Reply 65 of 335
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,742member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    I'm not sure what point you're making. On the one hand there's the idea that "outing" Mr. Cook is uncool, which, sure, although my impression is that his sexuality isn't exactly a secret. It's not like he's a deeply closeted Republican politician, or something.



    But on the other hand you seem to be saying that prominent gay people should remain closeted because ambient bigotry will cause problems for their companies, which I totally disagree with. That's simply capitulating to that bigotry, and allowing it to dictate the terms of people's lives.



    Knowing that Tim Cook is gay isn't "needlessly polarizing", the people who have a problem with that are needlessly polarized. It's an extremely important distinction.



    I said outing someone who may not want to be outed was uncool. That's true whether it's the far right doing the outing or whether it's an activist in the gay community that's doing the outing.



    It was Daniel Eran Dilger's linkbait to generate page views for AI that was designed to be polarizing. And self serving. Maybe they can change their domain name to TMZInsider.com instead?
  • Reply 66 of 335
    I thought that Valleywag article was reprehensible. Cook's sexuality is Cook's business and nobody else's. If he wants to come out then good for him and I'd admire his courage. The fact he hasn't is his personal decision. His outing all over the internet definitely isn't his personal decision.



    Another shining example of Gawker media link bait "journalism".
  • Reply 67 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archos View Post


    So if this was addressing a different minority, and said the "most powerful woman," the "most powerful black man," or any other category of people who are less likely to be promoted in society because of prejudice, would you also be feigning outrage?



    A "powerful black" man or a "powerful woman" are both members of "visible minorities" and as such don't have the same "decisions" to make re: their status. They have already been "outed", as it were. A gay person may or may not want their status to be made public. That is their decision to make .... not ours. A person's sexual orientation is none of our business. It is entirely up to Mr. Cook to decide "how public" he wants to be with this. AI has shown no respect at all for his privacy and should be rightly "taken to task" for this. This is the sort of thing I would expect to see in The National Enquirer .... but not in any sort of "professional news reports.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archos View Post


    It is offensive that you would try to censor such a message. Do you prefer gays begin depicted as a class of people who have to hide their identity lest anyone finding out they are "defective" or something? THAT'S offensive.



    There is a HUGE difference between censorship and a respect for an individuals privacy. I am always amazed at people like you who show no respect to others and hide their classless action in the "flag of censorship" .... as 'tho we had the "right" to discuss any one's life we wanted to. We don't.
  • Reply 68 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by REC View Post


    It's true. We do live in a country where gays don't always have basic rights, like the right to marry. This is our country. It should be talked about.



    As a group, yes ... but AI took it upon themselves to talk about an individual without even asking permission from said individual .... at least, afaik.
  • Reply 69 of 335
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,776member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    At least he's doing something worthwhile instead of fashion or hairdressing or telling women what they should to do to be more attractive.



    Seriously though, there needs to be more info on gay people that do other things besides the above to counter that stereotype! I can't stand watching all that next fashion/model/bimbo-superstar crap on TV with all the flamboyant gay men. Imagine if you're gay and you don't have a great haircut (dyed a flamboyant colour), super-snazzy outfits or a tight body... it can be tough.



    I'm a gay web developer and I work for one of the most recognizable companies in the world. This article did make me pause for a second and think why does it matter if the man is gay? However you made me change my mind.
  • Reply 70 of 335
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,784member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by halfyearsun View Post


    Seriously. This is gossip. And AI is reporting on gossip. Especially something as fiercely personal as this. I'd say it was an inappropriate and irresponsible choice to publish this



    100% agree. This is so not news worthy.
  • Reply 71 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    As to censorship that is BS in this case. Most of us come to AI to read up on Apple hardware, software and rumors. It isn't the place to discuss anybodies sex life, in that regard AI has failed miserably to excercise editorial control. Frankly this whole thread should be pulled because it pollutes the forum with crap that has nothing to do with Appleinsiders mission.



    I was reading your post and thinking, "wow, I can't believe I'm agreeing with you" .... then I read this: By definition they are defective....

    Surely you can't be serious with this statement. Tell me, are redheads "defective"? ... Blondes? .... blues eyes? .... short people ..... 7' tall NBA hopefuls?. Just what exactly, in your eyes, makes for a "non defective" person. Maybe you should rethink your posititon .... or did I just not understand what you were trying to say?
  • Reply 72 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solsun View Post


    This is not an Apple gadget site, this is an Apple site.. Any and all things related to Apple have been discussed and reported on this site, both rumors and facts.. I see no harm done here as nothing slanderous was published... And yes, I'm gay..



    Just because it wasn't slanderous doesn't mean it wasn't potentially embarrassing. There is such a thing as being concerned for a person's right to privacy.
  • Reply 73 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solsun View Post


    Irrelevant, Yes.



    Offensive, No.



    Your idea of "offensive" might be different if the story was about you, no?
  • Reply 74 of 335
    It must be a really slow news day that AI post crap like that. First of all. This is just gossip to create FUD. And even if it would be true. WHO CARES?!



    //Rob
  • Reply 75 of 335
    adonissmuadonissmu Posts: 1,776member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    There is outrage because Appleinsider is an Apple gadget site, this crap isn't about gadgets at all. Frankly it is diving into peoples personal lives for no good reason. It is objectionable in the same way that diving into Steves health issues is objectionable. Of course many don't see the ugliness of that either, to which we can credit to being brought up in leftist households.



    Appleinsider simply isn't the place for this. If one of the secretaries at Apple had a history of attending gang bangs would you want it detailed here? Seriously? For some it might be very interesting but let's face it there are plenty of sites on the net for that.



    Except Obama has none of those qualities. That has nothing to do with hate it is just a reflection of reality. What is sad here is that you use this forum and pathetic thread to try to elevate this man beyond what he is capable of. I'm not sure if you are trying to pull focus away from the issue at hand or what. As to the issue at hand what does gay sex have to do with Apple gadgets? That in a nut shell is the problem with this thread.





    By definition they are defective, just like anybody else with a birth defect. The great shame here is that any sort of birth defect associated with sex gets classed differently than any other birth defect. There is no justification for that. You can't go around treating people as leapers simple because of an accident of birth.



    As to censorship that is BS in this case. Most of us come to AI to read up on Apple hardware, software and rumors. It isn't the place to discuss anybodies sex life, in that regard AI has failed miserably to excercise editorial control. Frankly this whole thread should be pulled because it pollutes the forum with crap that has nothing to do with Appleinsiders mission.



    If you want editorial control go to China you ignorant bigot. You are the one who was born with a brain defect.
  • Reply 76 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ramkoff View Post


    AI isn't speculating that Tim Cook is gay, they are just reporting that Valleywag is profiling him as such.



    As for those offended by AI "outing" him, I remind you that AI is not reporting him as being gay Valleywag is. And seeing that there has been no official confirmation from Cook himself he is hardly "out".



    Ahhh, so AI is not "starting the rumor" ..... they're just "spreading it". In that case .... all is well ..... NOT!
  • Reply 77 of 335
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    .... That said, there is enough of a stigma and enough discrimination that you still don't "out" someone who hasn't already self-identified themselves as gay. It just isn't done.



    How odd is it that someone from the middle of the country would have to explain that to left coasters...



    Not odd at all ..... common sense rules. ....
  • Reply 78 of 335
    lorrelorre Posts: 396member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post


    But he's not just someone from the Bay Area anymore. He has to do business in places like Omaha (where there is a good Apple store OBTW) and across the entire world where they sometimes take a far dimmer view of gays than they do in Omaha.



    Does anyone think that Fox News wouldn't lead every Apple story with "the gay CEO of Apple" (or whatever) from here on out? Why polarize where it's not necessary or productive?



    This is actually the most relevant post in this entire topic if you ask me.



    I have a few gay friends, and personally I feel like a gay CEO should be a total non-issue. However, many people (and countries) don't see it that way. In big parts of the world, homophily is still a very big taboo.

    And many of those areas where it's taboo are important growth markets for Apple.



    I wonder how this will affect Apple's growth in areas such as China and the Middle East. I really cannot imagine those Saudi oil sheikhs buying $2000 laptops from a company that has a "sinfull" CEO. Maybe they'll even ban Apple products... I really hope I'm wrong though, as to me, Tim Cook seems like an extremely capable guy that would be a very worthy successor for Steve Jobs, and I wish him all the best in running this company.



    And I, together with many of the people here, hope that one day being gay will be a complete non-issue all over the world.
  • Reply 79 of 335
    eyeeye Posts: 3member
    I've been looking for an article:



    "Steve Jobs, the most powerful heterosexual man in Silicon Valley"



    But... I didn't find it...
  • Reply 80 of 335
    jon tjon t Posts: 131member
    I didn't know he was gay, and I did not need to know he was either. That is his PRIVATE business and Daniel, as a defender of your writings, I am disappointed.



    Would any other of his life choices be pertinent enough to make a headline? Does he prefer wine to beer? I doubt it, and neither should his being gay, if he is, because I wouldn't have a clue, and am not interested in having a clue either.



    It seems to me this feeds your personal troupe of troll-monkeys with plenty more fuel to put on the fire.



    A pity.
Sign In or Register to comment.