Taylor Swift Associates Pissed About Article Speculating on Her Sexuality
Share- Nishadil
- January 07, 2024
- 0 Comments
- 1 minutes read
- 13 Views

Taylor Swift was recently speculated to be a member of the LGBTQ+ community in an entire article, leading to considerable annoyance among her immediate circle. The article, entitled "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do", was authored by queer writer Anna Marks and published in the New York Times. The article is an examination of the conjecture that Swift might not be straight. "The first time I viewed ‘Lover’ through the prism of queerness, I felt delirious, almost insane," Anna Marks writes, "I questioned whether what I saw in her work was genuinely there or simply a fanciful projection." Anna Marks discusses instances throughout Swift's career that she interprets as possible signs of Swift being LGBTQ+. Marks argues that these signs began appearing in Swift's art well before queer identity was widely accepted and marketed in mainstream America, hinting to queer individuals that she might be one of their own. However, Swift's team seems to find this a stretch. Despite being an ally to the LGBTQ+ community, Swift herself has never explicitly shown any romantic or sexual interest in anyone other than men, a fact demonstrated by her dating history. Someone close to Swift expressed serious concerns to CNN, arguing that the article undermines ethics and would never have been published if it were about a male artist, such as Shawn Mendes, whose sexuality has also been scrutinized by fans. They further criticized some journalists for crossing boundaries when writing about Swift, claiming the pieces can be invasive, untrue and inappropriate, yet are defended as 'opinion pieces. Indeed, discussions about heterosexual male pop stars' sexuality, such as Harry Styles and Bad Bunny, have been written. However, their point stands: respect people's privacy. Supporting the LGBTQ+ community does not necessarily mean one identifies as LGBTQ+.
Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on