xeni at June 27th, 2014 15:02 — #1
michaelditullio at June 27th, 2014 15:06 — #2
Well if Tim being gay is a secret, it's a badly kept secret.
ratel at June 27th, 2014 15:08 — #3
What I want to know is if a gay CEO can balance that with being a good mother.
brainspore at June 27th, 2014 15:11 — #4
I don't know that it's a "secret" but it's something he's never publicly confirmed nor denied, so it at least falls into "something Cook doesn't feel like putting in public discussion" territory.
sblundy at June 27th, 2014 15:15 — #5
I had a 'What about Tim Cook' response to this review of The Glass Closet by John Browne. It asserted that there are no out CEOs. I guess Tim's the exception that proves the rule. Everybody knows, but he's not confirming, he's not actually out, demonstrating that there are no out CEOs.
samsa at June 27th, 2014 15:27 — #6
I always took this letter as a de facto coming out but I can see where it might still be considered a private matter.
phasmafelis at June 27th, 2014 15:27 — #7
I'm...not sure why this is awkward? I mean, he is gay, right? I can see there being some confusion between him simply being out (which he is) and being outspoken (which he's not), but it's not like it's a gigantic faux pas.
franko at June 27th, 2014 15:29 — #8
exactly. it's his personal choice not to be more out, but he's definitely out in his own way. his twitter feed, while mostly silent, does occasionally applaud things based on equal rights for all regardless of sexuality. read it however you want, of course, but it seems like that's the level of visibility he's comfortable with. and that's ok.
old at June 27th, 2014 15:35 — #9
Does anyone have any insight on why it seems "ok" for entertainment figures to be out, but not business figures?
bobtato at June 27th, 2014 15:36 — #10
I think Tim Cook gets the tone about right (for someone who isn't interested in talking about their home life). He doesn't appear to be discouraging the discussion, and if people try to make it into a story for prurient reasons it makes them look bad all by themselves.
I'm possibly saying that because it's my own approach to being out at work. Occasionally it leads to someone only realising I'm an invert after they've known me casually for years, which is awkward. But the alternative is to hang some kind of bell around my neck, which I don't feel obliged to do.
markdow at June 27th, 2014 15:42 — #11
This discussion should be focused on board of directors choices, not any particular CEO's or CEOs in general. It is the boards' decisions that have resulted in a lack of openly gay leadership.
brainspore at June 27th, 2014 15:43 — #12
It's not the career-killer it used to be, but most industry insiders will tell you that there's still no shortage of closeted actors in Hollywood. Take a sample set of how many people in your local college theater department are gay, extrapolate to the entertainment industry at large and do the math.
I think the entertainment industry might be slightly ahead of corporate America just because "Big Business" usually means "Old Rich White Guys in Suits," i.e. the kind of guys who usually lean conservative.
bobtato at June 27th, 2014 15:44 — #13
I'm not sure which fields of entertainment you're referring to-- the evidence (and rumors) suggest movie actors and sportspeople are far from comfortable about coming out.
People in business generally have much lower profiles than those in showbiz, so I have no idea how common it is for them to be closeted. I'd assume it depends on the industry and the type of role; if you were in a personality-based job like sales and/or a macho industry like construction, being gay might still affect how people deal with you and, in turn, your bottom line.
knelmes at June 27th, 2014 15:48 — #14
huh? If I didn't know he was gay (and actually I didn't before today) I wouldn't read this and think he's coming out. It's a letter supporting equal rights for homosexuals - is everyone who agrees with these views gay?
sblundy at June 27th, 2014 15:53 — #15
Forgive my ignorance, but what's an invert?
waterloonie at June 27th, 2014 16:03 — #16
An outdated psychological term for someone "showing sexual inversion." AKA a homosexual.
bobtato at June 27th, 2014 16:06 — #17
Yes, sorry, I meant gay. I just like using that Victorian word for my own amusement.
(In conversation, I'd pause and look around the room before stage-whispering it)
wearysky at June 27th, 2014 16:19 — #18
Count me, as well, among those who had no idea that Tim Cook was gay. Also, among the people who don't think it matters one way or the other.
avunculoid at June 27th, 2014 16:34 — #19
He could have saved it! All he had to do when he realised his faux-pas was say: "he's gay...uh, excuse me, 'he's gay'?!?--he's blind" See how it's done (with apologies for video quality)
mathew at June 27th, 2014 16:44 — #20
Steve Jobs didn't like talking about his family/personal relationships either, did he?
At least Tim Cook presumably hasn't disowned his own offspring...
next page →