Quote:
Originally posted by Rihinvention
I think he comes from a new generation where it's such a secondary part of his identity. He's not proud of it. He's not ashamed of it. It's just who he is. Like the fact that he has blue eyes. Is he proud that he has blue eyes? No. Is he ashamed that he has blue eyes? No. It's just his eye colour. Similarly, his sexuality doesn't seem to be a big deal to him. The media might try and make it out to be a big deal by being like "Sam Smith is gay!" or "Sam Smith's songs are about a man!" but he just shrugs it off and is like "well, yeah." Simply being gay in the public eye helps other gay people realise there are lots of other people in the world like them. Shrugging it off like "it's not a big deal, it's just who I am" also makes people realise that it's not a big deal, that's just who some people are.
And as many people have pointed out, gender neutrality creates a wider audience for listening to a song. Straight male, straight female, gay male, gay female. "You" can be substituted for any gender/sexuality's perspective. "Him" or "her" limits this.
|
And also kinda erases gayness altogether. Which I think is the point OP is getting at.
He's being smart though. I'd do the same thing to make it big in the beginning. If his goal is marketability (
) sure. Bleach out any possible gay part of you so you can get the katy perry / one republic demographic. But if your goal is to write a good love song from a gay perspective (
) you'd make it authentic aka use proper pronouns so we know who you're singing about.