'60 Minutes' Profiles Gay Teen Scientist, Ignores His Sexuality
'60 MINUTES' PROFILES GAY TEEN SCIENTIST, IGNORES HIS SEXUALITY BY: JASE PEEPLES 10.15.2013 Jack Andraka, the gay teen who became known as the “Boy Wonder” of science after developing a new method to detect pancreatic cancer earned him the grand prize at the Intel International Science and Engineering Fair, was profiled in the latest episode of 60 Minutes.
However, while the news program managed to focus on everything from Andraka’s theories to his family life, the fact that he is gay was conveniently omitted from the science prodigy’s profile.
Though Andraka’s story is inspiring regardless, 60 Minutes’ failure to include any mention of his sexuality is a missed an opportunity to both fight negative stereotypes and offer hope to LGBT youth who are underrepresented in the media compared to their straight counterparts.
Watch the 60 Minutes segment below, but see the 16-year-old discuss his sexuality in an earlier profile here.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||11/10/2013|
Well, I'm sorry I missed it if only to see a dead man make that joke, R1.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||10/15/2013|
That kid's flames could be seen from here!
|by Anonymous||reply 3||10/15/2013|
r4 and r5 said it. Thank you! There is no reason for this guy's sexuality to be the subject of the 60 min. report. Just as there would be no reason for a teen scientist's heterosexuality - or bisexuality - to be the subject of a profile about him.
It is, in fact, what we've always wanted.
Would 60 minutes have included in a profile about a teen scientist, that he was Jewish or Mormon? Wouldn't it have seemed odd if they had made an issue out of such a subject's religion? Why the fuck then should they comment on his sexuality?
|by Anonymous||reply 7||10/15/2013|
Morley Safer. Different dinosaur. They all start to look like Andy Rooney after a while.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||10/15/2013|
Sweet kid but would anyone confuse him for being straight?
|by Anonymous||reply 9||10/15/2013|
What the hell, OP? The story is the achievement of the kid, not that he may or may not want to suck cock or fuck or get fucked. He is 16, his sexuality does not concern you. Apparently his achievements don't.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||10/15/2013|
I had no idea that he was gay(from the segment) and I feel enriched by the knowledge. In today's world of bullying it would have been kind of a nice 'it can be pretty good now' message to all the struggling gay teens who are being instructed to wait it out. It's like the famous scene in 'I Am Curious(Yellow)'.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||10/15/2013|
Where others see this as a realization of so-called non-issue times, I see the point of the OP. That this is a matter of pride in one of our own. I think there is a wide gulf between pride within the community and parading this kid around with a "gay scientist" label.
And furthermore, stop acting as though the treatment and portrayal of GLBT people is somehow resolved and better because sexuality is not mentioned. Because it is. If Playboy was mentioned, Sean Cody should have been as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||10/15/2013|
If he'd done something bad, I'm sure his sexuality would have been mentioned.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||10/16/2013|
The OP is exactly right and I can't believe the responses of the posters so far
[quote]The story is the achievement of the kid, not that he may or may not want to suck cock or fuck or get fucked.
Are you fucking kidding me? You sound like some damn social conservative right winger. The simple fact he is gay is not about him "wanting to suck cock or get fucked", that is you trying to make it sexual, it is just an innocent fact about him no different than he happened to be straight (which was implied with the playboy joke). This is a kid who was specifically talked about wanting to be a gay role model.
The ONLY reason the fact he is gay wasn't mentioned is 60 minutes knew a lot of their viewership would be feel uncomfortable and upset about his story if all of a sudden they knew he was gay.
Everyone who doesn't understand that or wants to argue otherwise needs to have a good hard look in the mirror.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||10/16/2013|
Smart AND adorable. Great story.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||10/16/2013|
I am thrilled to discover that this young genius is gay.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||10/16/2013|
What's supposed to be so cute about the Playboy joke? Not only did they ignore his being gay, they went further and tried to "in" him too. Quite offensive, especially considering the kid apparently has said he wants to be a gay role model, according to r15.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||10/16/2013|
Almost all people presume heterosexuality in all but the most flaming cases, r18; you know that.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||10/16/2013|
What makes you think Morley Safer even knew the kid is gay? It wasn't relevant to the story.
Sometimes the gay community is it's own worst enemy.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||10/16/2013|
You never had a theory. Not one based on truth and logic, anyway.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||10/16/2013|
I'll bet anyone who is miffed that the report didn't mention his sexuality is in e-l-d-e-r-g-a-y territory and hates Led Zeppelin.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||10/16/2013|
R15 is so lost. 60 Minutes made no effort to play down the fact he was gay, quite the opposite if you paid attention.
There's an unfortunate segment of our club that feels it's necessary to drive home our sexuality 24/7 to a society which frankly doesn't care that much anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||10/16/2013|
Just remember, it's not about what amazing things this kid has done. It's about stripping down a person's achievements to the right category so R13 can feel proud of himself.
R13? We have a thing for people who want to feel proud of achievements they had nothing to do with. It's called sports.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||10/16/2013|
You morons are wrong. We're not anywhere near a post-sexual identity society when 30+ states ban gay marriage as a matter of law and homosexuality can get one fired in the vast majority of states.
He is a member of an actively oppressed minority and should be affirmatively recognized as such, in the same way that fucking Marco Rubio is constantly labeled a "Latino."
|by Anonymous||reply 27||10/16/2013|
It's because he's a minor.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||10/16/2013|
Sick and tired of jocks or actors or anybody feeling the need to let the world that they suck cock and get fucked and are twirly faggots. Get over it!
|by Anonymous||reply 29||10/16/2013|
[quote]The ONLY reason the fact he is gay wasn't mentioned is 60 minutes knew a lot of their viewership would be feel uncomfortable and upset about his story if all of a sudden they knew he was gay
I don't know...60 Minutes did air this piece:
|by Anonymous||reply 30||10/16/2013|
[quote]not that he may or may not want to suck cock
I don't think there are any "may nots" about it.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||10/16/2013|
He may not have WANTED his sexuality discussing in clearance with the program. He may just have wanted to focus on his achievements and family life.
There's nothing wrong with that. I can see it from both POV but ultimately it was his decision. Good for him. He's a fine young man anyway and everyone should be really proud.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||10/16/2013|
His sexuality is relevant because 60 Minutes is shown across the country and there are still people out there who think we are a joke. Stories like this one can help change their minds.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||10/16/2013|
I think it had more to do with his age. He hardly seemed fully physically formed. It was obvious to anyone who is related to or friends with a young gay male, that he is/will be gay. I found the story very uplifting. He'll go far just being himself. He's not hiding.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||10/16/2013|
He wants to be a gay role model r32. I doubt he's the one who chose to exclude that personal detail.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||10/16/2013|
Mentioning he's gay wouldn't be anymore age-inappropriate than the stupid Playboy joke.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||10/16/2013|
r25= Log Cabin Republican
|by Anonymous||reply 37||10/16/2013|
This thread is full of people willing to settle for second best. There is a difference between reaching the point where sexuality is a non-issue and going back to the point when gay men called their boyfriend their room-mate and played the hilarious eunuch role so as not to accept the straights.
You can still be fired for being gay. It's an issue. Deal with it.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||10/16/2013|
His sexuality was irrelevant to the piece. Get over yourselves.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||10/16/2013|
Yeah, I like how r32 started by saying the kid *may* have said the topic is off-limits, and then the rest of the post just assumes that's exactly what happened, with no evidence supporting it. The guy said he wants to be a gay role model, so it's extremely unlikely it was his idea to be presented as a hetero boy who loves Playboy.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||10/16/2013|
From Alan Turing to Jack Andraka, you better believe that his sexuality is a big fucking deal.
What good would have come from this if his parents were religious freaks who threw him out of his home when he was 12?
Someone aught to interview his parents about how his sexuality is a non-issue. This is the modern gay family.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||10/16/2013|
Maybe mentioning his sexuality would sound too much like, "he is gay AND he is a great scientist. Can you believe that?"
|by Anonymous||reply 43||10/16/2013|
I always forget how many self loathing closet cases are on the DL until a post like this. It isn't progress to ignore, at this point it is progress to just treat it casually like it isn't a big deal, which it isn't.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||10/16/2013|
I think it's worth mentioning he is gay. If he wants to be a gay role model, with all the bullying that goes on, it is important to show a happy, smart, gay success!!
|by Anonymous||reply 45||10/16/2013|
"What makes you think Morley Safer even knew the kid is gay? It wasn't relevant to the story.
Sometimes the gay community is it's own worst enemy."
As your post illustrates.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||10/16/2013|
What I found most interesting was that his parents didn't seem particularly intelligent in comparison with how their two sons turned out. I expected them to be super nerdy/intellectual snob types. Nope. They looked as normal as could be.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||10/16/2013|
R23 your self loathing is tiresome.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||10/16/2013|
R24 You show your ignorant youth--many of us in that age territory grew up on Led Zeppelin--"Stairway to Heaven" was the "theme" for my Junior Prom in 1974, to which I took my then-girlfriend (we both came out during college). Do you assume your generation is the first to discover them, probably because of the use of their music in the "Girl with the Dragqueen Tattoo" movie? Please.
As to the central issue. I read him as gay or going-to-be gay when I saw the story--I called him a "gerd" (gay nerd) when my partner and I watched it. I didn't know whether he (Junior, the kid) knew it yet--at that age, it can be very complicated. I thought he was sweet, adorkable (as you kids say), and I was in awe of his achievements and of how wonderfully ordinary (in a good sense) his parents seemed. I thought, even if he's not out yet (either to the world or to himself), when he does come out I bet his parents will cherish him as much and be just as proud of him. I think he can be out now that people know of his achievement--as part of the initial story, it's possible it would have been a distraction from the more important lede of his scientific work. Sad to say, but it may be the case.
Now he can be as gay as Jack McFarland, but he will also always simultaneously be that genius science guy. And if he'd been out on the show (a scene showing him on a date with a boyfriend) that would have been fine, too.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||10/16/2013|
When I saw him screaming while excepting his award, I thought...Gurlfriend!
|by Anonymous||reply 50||10/16/2013|
Dear God Morley Safer looks like the wheel him out of the crypt to do his spots.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||10/16/2013|
I watched the whole interview and his sexual orientation did not come up. But he's only a teen and interviews from old men discussing sex with a teen would be pervy. I did wonder, though, because he is really adorable.
His accomplishments to date are remarkable. I'm glad to see the media focus on all the incredible young people lately. Much better use of the media space than following the Hollywood famewhores. In fact, I'd love it if all we had were stories about constructive interesting people and there was a media blackout on the famewhores.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||10/16/2013|
[quote]But he's only a teen and interviews from old men discussing sex with a teen would be pervy.
Mentioned the simple fact he is gay is not being pervy or discussing sex. At All. Gods some of you are so pathetic. You sound like those freeper parents talking about they don't want their kids to be exposed to homosexuality because it is deviant.
He is gay, that is no different than his race or his gender.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||10/16/2013|
Thanks for that link, OP. I liked his views on a number of things.
Here's another link about similar brilliance that will likely not be realized. If you read, pay attention to the brilliant little girl, but also to her remarkable teacher and, finally, to the dead-end administrator. His attitude is why Mexico is the way it is and why we have an immigration problem.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||10/16/2013|
Score one for the gay team!
|by Anonymous||reply 55||10/16/2013|
Was his brother and family life "relevant" to the piece, r39? Get over [italic]your[/self].
|by Anonymous||reply 56||10/16/2013|
[italic]From Alan Turing to Jack Andraka, you better believe that his sexuality is a big fucking deal.
What good would have come from this if his parents were religious freaks who threw him out of his home when he was 12?
Someone aught to interview his parents about how his sexuality is a non-issue. This is the modern gay family.[/italic]
Save it for your shrink, honey.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||10/16/2013|
I think any time a person is a minority, it's relevant.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||10/16/2013|
[quote]I think any time a person is a minority, it's relevant.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||10/16/2013|
I figured he was gay, but unless he was willing to say it or make an issue of it, then it was just a guess - and really none of my business. It's refreshing that his being gay wasn't screamed about - it really wasn't relevant. I guess it's nice knowing that "one of ours" did a great thing, but it's still none of my business.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||10/16/2013|
[quote]but unless he was willing to say it or make an issue of it, then it was just a guess - and really none of my business
What are you talking about? He has been openly gay since he was 13. He has happily done many many interviews talking about being gay. He has talked about how he didn't know any gay scientists other than Alan Turing growing up and he has happy to be an example to other LBGT youth.
It seems like people are ignoring the reality of the situation to try to trot out some old 1950s mindset that being gay needs to be kept behind closed doors and not something you publicly acknowledge.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||10/16/2013|
I watched the whole segment and I don't see where it could have fit in, except in the part where he has had many speaking engagements; I wonder if any of those were before gay groups or something similar?
|by Anonymous||reply 62||10/16/2013|
R61, calm the fuck down. I don't KNOW the kid - I just saw a piece about him on television. Where they didn't mention his sexuality.
SO I FUCKING GUESSED.
If cunts like you would calm down for two god damned seconds and read someone's post before flipping out about it, you'd save everyone a lot of time.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||10/16/2013|
The lad has many years ahead of him to decide if he wants to have his sexuality on public display, whether he's straight or gay. I think Sixty Minutes did the right thing (provided they knew from the boy himself) in not referencing this information.
What if some jackass republican decided to kill the boy for simply being gay?
|by Anonymous||reply 66||10/16/2013|
R61, you really are a giant asshole. That was SO much reading into what I wrote, and you fucking well know it.
Well hey you ridiculous bitch, now the thread is yours. Feel free to randomly attack people for being on topic. Holy shit do I hope you trip on a curb today.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||10/16/2013|
r26, I'm sorry that you have a reading comprehension issue. I'm proud of the scientist, not myself and my post at r13 makes that clear.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||10/16/2013|
Isn't Cheyenne really into science guys? I mean, THAT'S what DLers really want to focus on...
|by Anonymous||reply 70||10/16/2013|
Yes, r70. He likes brainy, nerdy, guys.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||10/16/2013|
[quote] What if some jackass republican decided to kill the boy for simply being gay?
What. The. Fuck? Seriously, how is that a good argument for not mentioning his sexuality?
And calling him 'the lad' - condescending much?
|by Anonymous||reply 72||10/16/2013|
Oh please. They know darn well that if he were straight they would be asking. So, you have a girlfriend? Any time for dating?
|by Anonymous||reply 73||10/16/2013|
Allow me to play Devil's Advocate for a moment.. I think that this actually shows a very POSITIVE slant in the perspective of the media. They are in effect saying(without saying it literally) that his sexual orientation is not an issue at all. I remember the days when the word gay would be screaming in various headlines: "GAY man wins 400 meter race" "Gay Man charged with murdering his unsuspecting wife" etc. I recently watched a show on the marvelously crime-porny Investigative Discovery Network rehashing the notorious Murder case/trial of Durham NC fiction author and local gadfly Michael Peterson. When the case was current in the mid 2000's, the fact that Peterson was a down low bisexual procuring rentboys for his pleasure was the #1 most discussed and publicized issue in the State's case against him. Today, in the updated rehash of the case, that fact was NOT EVEN MENTIONED. All that was said was that Peterson spent many hours online emailing/hunting for appealing prostitutes--absolutely no mention was made of his sexuality. I thought that was indicative of the national climate which has been elevated to "what difference does it make??" A cheating man is a cheating man, and his preference in prostitutes is of no import.
Sooooo, perhaps the fact that 60 Minutes omitted the fact that the young man is gay is their way of saying, " A genius is a genius and his orientation is of no import." mebbe??
|by Anonymous||reply 75||10/16/2013|
Actually, I think it's kind of cool. I mean, do they ask straight people about their sexualities?
I'm proud to be gay. But I prefer the general public not ask me questions about it. It's kind of like going up to black people and only talking about Spike Lee or something that has nothing to do with anything other then race...it communicates you see that person's color before anything else.
Also, I would never want to discuss my homosexuality on television. That's just weird.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||10/16/2013|
They didn't need to blow a trumpet about his sexuality, but the host could have thrown in a comment to the subject that ended with "amiright, gurl!?" so as we'd all know.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||10/16/2013|
I think if he was straight and had a girl friend 60 Minutes would have included her in the program.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||10/16/2013|
It's not purses that spill out of that kid's mouth, it's an entire Chanel ensemble.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||10/16/2013|
But that's because it's kind of a headline: "Teen Scientist has girlfriend! shock"
|by Anonymous||reply 80||10/16/2013|
[quote] I mean, do they ask straight people about their sexualities?
And where is Straight Pride? Why isn't there a White History Month?
|by Anonymous||reply 81||10/16/2013|
If he was a serial killer they would have mentioned his sexuality a LOT.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||10/16/2013|
So many stupid gays on DL
|by Anonymous||reply 84||10/16/2013|
[quote] At 21 he'll be infested with HIV
Not if he shaves (DOWN THERE) and applies the right cream.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||10/16/2013|
Another idiot a couple of posts above. Why are they here?
|by Anonymous||reply 86||10/16/2013|
At 15/16, his sexuality is just not pertinent to the story. Give him a few years and he will be able to come out gracefully.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||10/16/2013|
I believe he IS out, gracefully.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||10/16/2013|
He is out, R87. You pearl clutchers can't conceive of someone under 18 having a sexuality that they're comfortable with. Not all teens undergo coming out drama.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||10/16/2013|
So, OP? Why does he have to be defined by his sexuality?
|by Anonymous||reply 90||10/16/2013|
What if he was straight? Do you think it should have been mentioned?
"And not only is he a teen scientist, but he's also a heterosexual!"
|by Anonymous||reply 91||10/16/2013|
r91, it's not like when 60M does a piece about this or that exceptional kids group in Harlem, the boys choir comes to mind, because you can SEE they are black. Heterosexuality is ASSUMED because it can't bee SEEN.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||10/17/2013|
Also, this kid PIIINGS to high heaven, has gay voice, looks like he's a Keebler Elf at the end of the production line smelling a ZILLION cookies and gave such a MARY! walk to the podium that you would have to be headless not to realize that he was gayer than Gay Gayerson singing Show Tunes in a tree full of parrots.
He is adorable.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||10/17/2013|
Queerty beat 60m by 4 months.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||10/19/2013|
"Adorable" is on "Dr. Oz" today.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||10/25/2013|
He was on The Daily Show...
|by Anonymous||reply 96||11/01/2013|
Home Slice was on The View this morning too. There was no mention of his homo-ness, but it was only a 5 minute segment (which included talking to his dad) so the only way they would have squeezed that in is if he wanted to get it in there.
Not like the 60 Minutes piece which was 16 minutes all about him and his accomplishments.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||11/06/2013|
[quote] that is you trying to make it sexual,
Sexuality is sexual.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||11/06/2013|
As Jack said himself, it wasn't so much his "intelligence" that led to his success, it was more his "creativity." After all, isn't creativity something that gay men are famous for?
I love that he is doing so well, and he's so out. I work in a very conservative pharmaceutical company. My department has over 200 people, but I don't know a single out gay person here. Sadly. But at least people like Jack are changing that. Good for him!
|by Anonymous||reply 99||11/06/2013|
Do you think this kid has had a boyfriend yet? ...or even been on a date?
|by Anonymous||reply 100||11/10/2013|