Actor Andrew Garfield States That He’s Gay ‘Without the Physical Act’

andrew garfield

Um, no. Doesn’t work that way.

From Yahoo: Andrew Garfield is facing some major backlash following comments he made on Monday, in which he said, “I am a gay man right now, just without the physical act.”

The 33-year-old actor, who is currently starring as Prior Walter in a London production of Angels in America, opened up about how he prepared for his role as a gay man during a Q&A panel.

“As far as I know, I am not a gay man,” the actor said, according to Gay Times Magazine. “Maybe I’ll have an awakening later in my life, which I’m sure will be wonderful and I’ll get to explore that part of the garden, but right now I’m secluded to my area.”

Garfield went on to explain that he was concerned that he didn’t have a right “to play this wonderful gay role,” since he does not identify as gay, and said that performing the part was about “doing honor, doing justice and knowing my herstory.”

In detailing the ways in which he has been preparing for the iconic part, Garfield mentioned that he has been dedicating a lot of time to watching RuPaul’s Drag Race, and explained that, every Sunday, he would “have eight friends over, and we would just watch Ru.”

“This is my life outside of this play,” Garfield explained. “I am a gay man right now, just without the physical act—that’s all.”

While the intent behind Garfield’s off-handed remarks is up for debate, many were offended by the statement, arguing that the star was suggesting that watching Drag Race was the extent of gay culture. The argument was also made that Garfield’s comments reflected an attitude of cultural appropriation and historical ignorance.

Actor Scott Evans responded to the actors comments on Twitter, writing, “Ur a talented guy,but seem to be completely oblivious to what is coming out of ur mouth.”

Another user wrote that Garfield “has a very limited view of what being gay ACTUALLY is.”

Read the rest of the story here.


17 responses to “Actor Andrew Garfield States That He’s Gay ‘Without the Physical Act’

  1. Serves him right that in his misguided effort to please the LGBT crowd, Andrew Garfield, a talented actor, ended up offending them with his nonsensical uttering. He’s an example of what PC does to a mind:

    Liked by 4 people

  2. Color me surrised. Homosexuals got their fellings hurt. Boo-hoo

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I wonder if he identified with being Spider Man before playing that role… or if any actor actually identifies with the characters they regularly role-play?
    I’m even less thrilled about the kid they have playing Spidey in the current Avengers movies. It’s getting as bad as whoring out the BatMan role every movie just to put over the actor du jour…
    Actually, had Garfield not done well in Gibson’s “Hacksaw Ridge” last year, I wouldn’t care for him at all. And I’d have guessed he actually was gay.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Kevin J Lankford

    Very stupid man; typical actor.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. I’ll say this much…at least he referenced the abominable “physical act” in regards to sodomites (some deviant heterosexuals copy the “act” as well)…which is neither an “awakening” nor “wonderful”.
    So many times sodomites want to push the narrative of “love” and “happiness” but they never talk openly about “the physical act” so that those who blindly support them are completely oblivious to their “acts”.
    Maybe his attempt at a PC statement will make some people question what was meant by “physical act” and the light of truth will shine on their dark minds.

    Liked by 3 people

  6. If being famous means having to say you’re gay even if you’re not, then it’s better to remain unfamous.
    Hollywood and the media are really pushing this ad nauseum, and I, for one, tune them out fairly well. Our current cultural dry rot really is disgusting. Garfield, make your money and get out—or lose your very SOUL.

    Liked by 3 people

    • The big drawback to acting like someone you’re not,in life,is that people then brand you with that,and you either have to continue to lie to them and yourself or you have to tell them the truth and risk losing the trust and respect you worked to gain.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. In London? Not gay? Just ask a few of the ‘Syrian refugees’ to help you with studying for the part. They will oblige.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. traildustfotm


    Liked by 2 people

  9. “Okay,I’m NOT really homosexual-but I DID sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night…”

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Virtue signaling…

    Liked by 3 people

  11. The only problem that I have run into with Christians who speak out against gays is that they don’t also speak out against heterosexual couples living in sin, as being the same thing. I was speaking with my cousin this weekend, and I told her that if her daughter lived with a man, and she was not as appalled at that as she would be by two gays living next door, then she was being hypocritical. She didn’t understand, completely. It’s just that for many, while in their heads they understand James 2:10, in their heart, homosexuality offends their sensibilities. I tried to explain to one of my cousins friends that no one sin is any different than any other. That if she called out gays, but was okay with having dinner with the neighbor couple, even though her husband told her that they were not married, but living together, she was not being honest. She should be willing to sit down to dinner with the gay couple as well.

    I do believe that if Jesus Himself were here, He certainly would sit with every single, sinful person He could. He ate with Zaccheus, He spoke with the woman at the well, He forgave the woman taken in the act of adultery. There is a pattern here. He didn’t overlook their sin. Jesus was not naive. What He was, was always seeking to find a way to draw someone to Himself. Now, I am not saying that we need to go and seek out gays to befriend. What I am saying is that before we condemn that person, we first should consider how many other sinful people in our lives there might be, who, even though they are not gay, are not saved by the Blood of Christ. Because as God sees them, they both look the same. And after salvation, they would also look the same.

    Liked by 1 person

    • “The only problem that I have run into with Christians who speak out against gays is that they don’t also speak out against heterosexual couples living in sin, as being the same thing.”

      In total agreement!

      I once said that to a male student who chose “gay” marriage for his Ethics class project. He was against; his reason was that legalizing “gay” marriage would ruin marriage as an institution. I said to him: “Heterosexuals had already done that with pre-marital sex and divorce. He wasn’t happy about that at all.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I think my issue is that “being gay” is not something we should accept like the ever popular “gender” choice. “Being gay” refers to an inclination. Practicing queer sex is a sin.

        As you say, sex out of marriage is also a sin. I’ll leave it to you to decide if one is more sinful than the other. I know what I think.

        Anyone can be forgiven their sins if they have genuine sorrow for them and work at not repeating them. Life is all about resistance to sin. It is not about “embracing sin”.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I wasn’t defending or excusing homosexuals. I was addressing my student’s and many heterosexuals’ “holier than thou” reason for opposing gay marriage — that legalizing gay marriage would ruin the institution of marriage, when we heterosexuals had already done a fine job eroding the institution with pre-marital sex, co-habitation, easy divorce, and adultery. You know, Christ’s scold in Matthew 7:5 about the beam in our eye & mote in brother’s eye, etc. etc.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Dr. E, I understand what you meant. I’m not arguing with it at all. We are called to live Christian lives. We must also realize that we are sinners. That doesn’t mean we should “embrace” our sinfulness. It means we should “understand” our sinful natures and that of others.

            Being “gay” in itself is not a sin. If one struggles with this disorder it should be commended. If one embraces it and then goes a step further and insists that others recognize their sinfulness as acceptable, I find it ridiculous.

            If I’m attracted to goats (don’t worry, I’m not), that’s a problem. If I decide to start “loving” goats, that’s a sin. To me it is a greater sin to refuse to acknowledge the problem and ask others to tell me that its alright.

            If I’m born a man but I like silk panties. It is better to work at losing my attraction for silk than to hang out in the dressing room at Target and demand that everyone put up with my presence there.

            Having cancer or transgender attraction are both diseases. Embracing one’s sickness is not the path to wellness.

            Liked by 1 person

  12. I suppose you could say that being “gay” is both a sin and an aberration. Or, rather, a “disorder”. The “sin” part is in the practice, not having the aberration.

    As a Christian, is is sinful to engage in sex without marriage. Nonetheless, most have, myself included. That does not particularly trouble me as I never claimed to be sinless and I don’t believe anyone else to be, either.

    Having an attraction for the opposite sex is normal. Just like I do not believe that “gender” is a “choice”, I do not believe that being attracted to same sex individuals is normal. It may or may not be “common”, but it isn’t “normal”.

    Consider what the Satanists say; “do as thou wilt”. Do we see a pattern here?

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s