nice responses from morrissey, i think. it's good to see him being fairly outspoken about his political and social views. the fact that this can be considered borderline criminal or unacceptable nowadays, simple freedom of expression, is pretty scary if you ask me. i hope morrissey continues to raise his voice for just causes and against the 'people' who continue to abuse us all and practically laugh in our faces at the same time.

i'm glad morrissey isn't going with the notion that this album somehow outs him. that's silly. so all the people who said this album outs him, are they the ones who were saying he was racist when he wrote national front disco? oh. no. so...accept what he says about it and leave the speculation alone, i suggest.

I think it's a sign of cowardace that he doesn't answer the questions about his sexuality honestly. You ask me what my sexuality is? A heterosexual... You ask my brother what his sexuality is? A homosexual. See??? Easy.
And neither my brother nor I hold our sexuality against each other.
It's 2006 Moz, drop the games and grow up.

This article was a very enjoyable read, however...
With that said, I think Morrissey's comment pondering what public reaction would be if he were "close to a female" is simply a diversionary tactic and something of a dangling carrot.

He now understands he may have said too much in regards to his sexuality in the Mojo article - danced too close to the fire, if you will, and now he wants to recant.

He is trying to make sure the mystery stays alive by somehow suggesting that the very real possibility exists that he might be very straight.

I don't think he's 100% sincere in his reasons for playing the devil's advocate on this one, however. I think he's simply trying to hang on to all of his varied and diverse fanbase (by suppressing a definitive, and potentially divisive, answer on his sexuality), while simultaneously 'dangling a carrot' for the straight crowd (which includes me).

Just a thought.

as a term that cannot be defined. It is a statement in itself, and I loved his anger at using words like homo and ghetero - very interesting

I have to go & buy it now.

Apparently Mystery Jets are on the free CD though so that takes the edge of woe off a little bit. I resent giving Conor Mc12year old my money.

Morrissey said "she" and this interviewer didn't stop and say, "ah! so what's her name?"

i would like to meet the person or entity brave enough to make a pass at God.

face it, Moz is one of the gayest men alive. his attempts at ambiguity are really just silly at this point and might have been original if employed in the early 70's (e.g., bolan, new york dolls), but clearly no longer are. he's got to find a new publicity tactic.

Why do we have to pin everyone into the boxes of hetero, homo, bi, PETA member/non-member, Democrat, Republican, liberal, Torry, progressive, Labor, conservative? There's something universal in saying that you are a sexual human being (like everyone else), instead of saying that you belong in a certain box. Granted, the universal is found in the details, but do the details need to mention these bland cardboard boxes?

Do some of you, who try to fit yourselves into Morrissey's boxes, want everyone else who hears a Morrissey CD say to themselves about the songs, "They say nothing to me about my life."

Of course, he can say whatever he wants in interviews. It would be nice if the music and the songs remained somewhat universal, however.

Ive noticed a lot of people saying that his abiguaty is a boring publicity stunt or that sexuallity doent matter! Then why are you all talking about it so much!

You have to in order to accumulate ... Moz did say he enjoyed people questioning rather than just assuming, so I'm going to join in with the 'questioning'.
It strikes me that what really winds people up here isn't the fact that Morrissey won't say, but the fact that he refuses to conform to any of our stereotypes. Why does someone have to be gay or straight or bi? I'll admit that everyone assumes things about people, and I assume that Morrissey's last few relationships have been with men.
However, it's taken as given that he's had relationships with women in the past, so where does that place him on the sexual scale? Simply a sexual being in my book. And he's tried to correct this idea that 'celibacy' was a long term lifestyle choice, anyone listening to his albums, solo or with The Smiths, can tell he wasn't living the life of a priest. So I don't understand why the world seems so shocked that he's dispensed with the double entendres and said something straightforward.
He must be having a right old laugh at all this speculation and argument.
And damn right he doesn't have to tell anybody about his private life. His music is founded on the fact that it appeals to as many people as possible. But he's also entitled to keep his private life private; he's always done things his way, why should this be any different? If your friend went through life telling people that they really didn't know what gender they liked, they just wanted to love and be loved, would you turn around to them at every opportunity and say 'you have a duty to tell people'? We're no longer living in a time where a law needs to be overturned. Some people may say that there is prejudice that still needs to be overcome; I agree. But someone like Morrissey 'coming out' would not change the mind of a homophobe. I actually think he's had more influence blurring the lines and smashing this idea of rigid labels.
The real reason fans want him to say one way or the other is purely selfish, they want him to conform to whatever fantasy they have for if / when they meet him ... that they can be his friend / lover / fag hag. Being a fan (especially of Morrissey) is all about gravitating towards a human being because you idolise them as a part of your life, as part of your personal experience. Fandom is possibly the least altruistic form of emotional expression; it's all about what Mozzer can do for you (or me) and one thing he won't do in the forseeable future is declare his sexual history.
One thing he will do is release an album that drives people into frenzied debate. That's the reason I love him.

“There are people who believe it’d be beneficial if you were to say you were gay.

“How would that help anybody? I do often find that people who listen and who are homo, or however you’d like to say it, want to believe in that aspect of the songs and people who listen who are hetero – it’s cringeworthy using both terms, but how else can I say it? – they want to believe in that aspect of the songs. It’s all down to the ear of the beholder. I’m not going to interfere.” ‘

Would that this will be remembered! In the great little film “A Taste of Honey”, quite something for the ‘60’s in England, sexuality from many perspectives is happening, and how it drives, and is driven by, personalities and circumstances is portrayed by the characters. At least Morrissey isn’t narrow-minded.

I know artists are usually considered to have more of a license to have opinions on politics and so on, but it would be distressing if anything said led to the furore following the Bush-Reagan comment in 2004. Still since then the world is waking up and dissenting voices are not so few anymore. Which reminds me of a recent newsflash: that President Bush has decided to take firm action against bird ‘flu – arrangements are being put in place to bomb the Canary Islands…

For the ever-enriching interview posts, thanks Tbevie, and specially Peter, who should be called Uncle Largesse, and is worth his weight in gold, time and time again! Did anyone by any chance post the first one? : )

A meal to celebrate a happy occasion, turned out to be a menu that took unfathomable steps backwards:

“I was a bit shocked by the menu, which wasn’t remotely animal-friendly. Pate de foie gras, which is horrific, and lamb! Would you serve curried child at your wedding? Lambs are simply children.”

Yet, good to see Morrissey pointing out a political milestone as well:

But, that aside, I think it’s historic and proves 100 points.”

why is morrissey so puffy? he's not fat...but he looks...puffy. he doesn't even really look old....just round...faced. he's let his hair grow out on the sides now..instead of the crew cut....so...that and the salt and pepper hair doesn't really flatter him much.

the hair color isn't even really that important...its a sign of age but a sign of wisdom as well...so....but i mean...its grown out on the side and it just adds to the puffy-ness of his face.

awe well,

saenz

A very general impression of mine is that Moz's answers have more composure and articulation than ever before, if compared, for example, with the terse and nearly snappy interviews he gave to Playboy in 2004.

His present patience in confronting with elegant tolerance the same old labeling arena of a media-shaped sexuality, who are always so eager for instant gratification, is amazing. "When it happens to be a he": I particularly love in this one the way with which he displays, in his frankness, his necessity to keep his relations anonymous, and yet imput them openly, in a taboo-free way in his art (which some are describing as more detailed than necessary). So, conclusion: it is not in the graphic details they're interested in, or how it feels like in the context of the song, but the great big answer. This is the part I think is so sad, because people interviewing artists, in a curiously sophisticated magazine, should be primarily (or ideally!) driven to their art. Makes you ponder on how many layers of prejudice human sexuality is stifled with.

The way he countinues to criticize
the counrty that was his home for close
to a decade - sorry no black gay female
for president this yr (is oprah running?)
he can say 'england for the english'
but i have been hammered on this site for
the same about 'america for the americans'
and as for the u.s.a bombing anyone, well...
when he sings a song about the horrors of 9/11
then maybe i would listen to his political views
this country is the target of the world
and he seems glad to help fuel the fire
iam sure when sung in concert these lines
will draw huge cheers - hes coming off like
another ungrateful foreigner , like his hector
buddies who come here not to be americans
but to wave there countrys flags in our face
dahm i love morrissey more then life
but iam not sorry for the things iv said

I don’t understand what all these postings that are still speculating whether Morrissey is gay or not. Up to this point Morrissey has been pretty ambiguous about his sexuality. Despite most of us knowing that he was gay, he has never gone on the record and admitted it. However, with this album there is no more ambiguity. The lyrics are pretty straight forward, Morrissey is singing about a man. Dear God and You Have Killed Me are both about men. I find it ridiculous that Morrissey would write such lyrics and then the interviewer would still ask him if he was gay. If I were the interviewer I would have asked him how he felt now that he is out of the closet. No one should be questioning or asking if he is gay, Morrissey has answered this question on this album and I would not allow him to play his game. From here on out the great Morrissey has admitted he is gay. No one should be asking if he is gay or not. The only question that should be asked is how he fills now that he has gone on record of being gay.

Do I like the fact that Morrissey is gay? That is the question that should be asked. I personally don’t like the fact that he officially went public. I don’t care if he likes penis or not. I have no problem with men who like men. I do have a problem with men who act like their women (but that’s a whole different subject). I just preferred that Morrissey stayed ambiguous, despite already knowing the truth. I felt as long as he stayed ambiguous he was telling the world it is none of their business. But, Morrissey can’t write an album where he confirms he is gay, and then tells the world it’s none of their business or that he might not be gay. If Morrissey doesn’t think his sexuality is our business then he should not write about it. I would have no problem ever speaking about his sexuality as long as Morrissey never publicly speaks about it either.

Again, I know some of you find it offensive anytime anyone writes their opinion. So, I will post this and go hang myself.

Can you buy this magazine or any of the others in Southern California? Has anyone seen them on stands yet?

Of course, we've seen this coming for years, in the form of chidlish, poorly written pop-songs, but after reading the current NME interview, it is finally revealed that Morrissey truly does possess the logical capacity of a 13 year old.

He calls Blair and Bush's alliance on Iraq "worse than terrorism." Yes, "worse" than terrorism, because apparently intentionally targeting and mass murdering random civilians in the name of religious ideology comes with some degree of mitigation. So, the bombings in London were just a way to get back at Blair by killing random civilians. That's as far as the discussion goes, so we should all be very understanding of the "terrorists" before condeming such acts.

It's interesting, but I didn't hear about Saddam putting people into a mixer so that they could form a democratic country. It's such an utterly absurd comment that it truly makes me wonder how someone like that survives on a day to day basis.

I mean, "ego" that's such an sunjective trait, that even the most cynical rationalist would not try to assert. How in the hell does Morrissey come to such nonsenical conlusions? The only answer is that he's intellectually lazy. He doesn't know the issues deeply, so he at least has to seem quotable, or else be rendered a know-nothing dullard.

Whatever your opinions are on the war (and honestly, who can take anyone seriously when it comes to politics on here?), Morrissey certainly wasn't writing terrible pop-songs about the mass slaughters, the torturing, and numeorus other human indignaties that were being performed by Saddam and his sons during their reign. You can certainly hate the war, but still be pleased that Saddam no longer stands atop Iraq. Only a sociopath would not feel such relief. Of course, that point is not at the forefront of Morrissey's mind. He cannot simply say that he disagrees with the intentions of the war. He has to make the logical jump of calling it worse than terrorism.

Finally, I see no mention of the atrocious level of women's rights in the M.E. I would hope that as an avowed feminist, Moz has a chorus in the works. Maybe not.

Now here's where the bullshit gets really thick. Morrissey calls for the nuclear bombing of China due to their poor animal rights record, but if the bombs involve targeting tyranical regimes, then that's clearly the act of the devil. If that idea doesn't smell of fascist tendencies, then I don't know what does.

Why don't journalist pin Morrissey down on such ridiculous statements and challenge a much more deep, and thoughtful explanation? It would certainly be much more interesting than constantly trying to get a gay man to admit that he really is gay.

Now, beyond that, Morrissey's flirtation with convoluted spiritual nonsense is a whole other bag. It's just abstract silliness. It's like watching a man trying to feign intelligence. It's very sixties. Morrissey is not an intellectual. He's just one big emotional response. IIf you don't follow the news, then how on earth can you form a relevant opinion on political topics? Even if he did follow the news, he obviously would not use much critical review of the information that was being given to him.

Anyone who cannot readily condemn this behavior his is either mildly retarded, or truly has no moral sense.

Enjoy his music, and coo like a silly woman about his looks, but call a spade a spade, and admit that he has simply lost it on worldviews. If not, then I will be forced to accept that the majority of you really are socially retarded, music nerds.

interesting

I don't understand why people feel a constant need to categorise all men as "GAY" or "NOT GAY." Morrissey has stated his gender so many times as "closer to transsexualism than anything" "the prophet for the third gender" and now "closer to female than anything."

Morrissey has GENDER role issues rather than simple SEXUALITY issues. He is somewhat transgendered at the very least and so - naturally - it makes sense for him to reject "homo" and "hetero" as one size-fits-all categories meaning "male attracted to male" and "male attracted to female" when he himself doesn't even feel completely male. That's the truth. He's said it so many times. Why do people feel the need to twist his words?

So, so many times he's said he's transgendered and that he's had sexual relations with men AND women. It's not brain surgery, folks.

Besides that obvious snippet of interest, it was a pretty boring interview. I don't particularly mind - I realise he's feeling happy and probably doesn't feel the need to be so witty anymore.

Still, that was truly boring, as was the MOJO interview from little I read of it. I didn't bother to buy either magazine.

It's a shame because old Morrissey interviews were events, and were witty, charming, erudite and filled with smart pop culture references. Not that I care terribly. I am anticipating the release of the new album - that's what I REALLY care about.

broken

I'm afraid it looks like ROTT is another patchy Morrissey solo album. Uncut's review came out today and gave it a meagre 3 out of 5 saying that the music was good but the lyrics were pretty duff. Looks like the Observer review was something of a red herring...
Reviews to date:
Oberver 5/5
Q 3/5
Mojo 4/5 (the most Moz-friendly UK music mag)
Uncut 3/5
Some rock mag 3/5.
We really should learn not to get carried away by those early listening party reports...
J

I honestly don't see why anyone would care so much.... would it make your life any better or more fulfilled if you knew whether Morrissey takes men or women to bed?? What the heck?

It's none of anyone's business unless he decides to have it splashed all over hello! magazine like yer average pathetic popstar.

But regardless of that, I think just about everything he says these days is sparked with wit and wisdom. It's moments like these that I remember why I fell and keep falling for him. He's so, so special and I can't wait to see him in May....

Mozzarella

not a single person has ever mentioned in public/in print that they slept with Morrissey, or more indirectly spoke of their relationship. As Morrissey said, he hasn't been celibate for a long time...

I can't think of one person at the considerable level of fame Morrissey has, that hasn't had at least one of their ex-partners say something about them in the media. That doesn't have to mean sex-related talk -- I mean anything about their relationship.

I think Morrissey has never been able to label himself, therefore he's uncomfortable with labels. The "evidence" (excuse the stupid terminology) points toward at least some hint of relationship with men, but...

I truly don't care either way, and whatever truth that came out wouldn't surprise me (unless it didn't involve humans) but what fascinates me is the Svengali-like hold he must have over past/present lovers not to talk about him!

I agree with most of what you are saying. I have been saying this for sometime, but each time I say something in this vain I get prosecuted. I have come to the conclusion that most of the people on this site are little kids. Because, any adult with half a brain would question such accusations. Not to say that I don’t have any reservations about the Iraq war, I just feel that you should be able to back up your accusations. If Morrissey is going to jump into the political arena then he needs to offer more in dept remarks. Morrissey generalizes too much regarding politics. Morrissey just states the headline without offering the body of the material. You have to understand that most people or kids on this site only need the headline, they won’t question anything. As adults you and I understand that it’s not that simple. The Iraq war is much more complicated than just Bush and Blair acting like terrorist.

Morrissey’s interviews are completely controlled by Morrissey. These poor interviewers are afraid to pin Morrissey down on anything. They ask generic questions and accept generalized vague answers. Any true interviewer would press Morrissey for a solid response. For example, Morrissey has gone on the record with this new album about being gay. There is no doubt after this album that he is gay, yet the interviewer is still asking him if he is gay and Morrissey is side stepping the question. Any true interviewer would not allow Morrissey to deny what he has already admitted too.

As a long time Morrissey fan I have been very disappointed with Morrissey over the last several years. Morrissey has lost everything he built over the last 20 years. Morrissey is losing his credibility with older fans.

Bono from U2 has a lot to say about politics, but I respect him because he’s out there doing something about it. All Morrissey does is bitch about Bush and Blair, but has done nothing personally to fix it (writing crappy lyrics that ruin potentially good songs is not the answer).

Morrissey needs to stay away from politics and gayness. I don’t care about his political views or if he likes penis or not. Just write good music like you once did.