It's probably better to avoid getting involved in this, as I am very ambivalent but here it goes . . . I agree that a forum such as screen-l is probably not the place for "outing." Moreover, as a straight person, I feel _I_ would have no business outing anyone anywhere. However, I do buy the argument made by some gays, lesbians, and bis that there is an important ethical difference between outing someone who simply wants to remain private and outing someone who actively works against the interests of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals (the classic case of this is Roy Cohn). If the discussion on screen-l was about what I think it was about, a recent film starring the actor in question has been under much fire precisely for its extremely negative portrayal of a gay man. One might argue that this puts the actor in question (even tho' in a different role in the movie) under the Roy Cohn category, particularly as the actor in question has tried to present the movie in the opposite light (i.e. has gotten involved in this debate). Finally, while the "outing question" is important to resolve, I'm not sure it has much to do with this case. I thought that the actor in question was more or less "out" already. If so, the movie, the accusations against it, and the actor's (implicit) response to those accusations, would, I think, provide very interesting ground for a screen-l discussion on the relationship between negative portrayals of a member of a group, negative images of that group in general, and actors who belong to that group involving themselves in such an effort (actually, this problem has effected african-american actors for many years). Sorry for all the coded language above. --Ben Alpers (blalpers@pucc) Princeton University (for whom I do not speak, and who does not speak for me)