Taylor Swift source slams ‘untrue and inappropriate’ NY Times op-ed speculating on her closeted queerness

Taylor Swift’s sexuality is the subject of a controversial New York Times opinion piece, which a source close to the singer has slammed as “invasive, untrue, and inappropriate.”

The 5,000-word article, published on Thursday, asserts that Swift is a closeted queer person, based off of various LGBTQ references found in her songs and performances.

“There seems to be no boundary some journalists won’t cross when writing about Taylor, regardless of how invasive, untrue, and inappropriate it is — all under the protective veil of an ‘opinion piece,’” a person close to the situation told CNN on Saturday.

“Because of her massive success, in this moment there is a Taylor-shaped hole in people’s ethics,” the source added, speaking on a condition of anonymity. “This article wouldn’t have been allowed to be written about Shawn Mendes or any male artist whose sexuality has been questioned by fans.”

New York Times editor Anna Marks, who penned the piece about Swift, suggests that the references in her songs are intentional hints from the pop star.

Marks writes of the idea of “‘dropped hairpins,’ or the covert ways someone can signal queer identity to those in the know while leaving others comfortable in their ignorance.”

“Those dropped hairpins began to appear in Ms. Swift’s artistry long before queer identity was undeniably marketable to mainstream America. They suggest to queer people that she is one of us,” Marks adds.

She points to a moment in 2019, when Swift was preparing to release “Lover,” the first album she created with new creative freedom after leaving her old Nashville-based label, “Big Machine Records.”

It was the launch of her “Lover Era” — an aesthetic that Marks says was highlighted by “rainbows, butterflies and pastel shades of blue, purple and pink, colors that subtly evoke the bisexual pride flag.”

“Lacking her old label’s constraints, she specifically chose to feature activism for and the aesthetics of the LGBTQ community in her confessional, self-expressive art,” Marks writes. “What if the ‘Lover Era’ was merely Ms. Swift’s attempt to douse her work — and herself — in rainbows, as so many baby queers feel compelled to do as they come out to the world?”

Aside from other hints such as “frequently depict(ing) herself as trapped in glass closets or, well, in regular closets,” Marks suggests the singer’s current relationship with NFL tight end Travis Kelce is not all it might seem to be.

She writes that the relationship could simply be an “attention-grabbing, if not lucrative,” partnership that reinforces fans’ obsession with Swift’s romantic life and the music it inspires.

Swift has been an outspoken ally of the LGBTQ community in the past, taking stands against various pieces of anti-gay legislation, but has denied that she, herself, is a member of the community.

Supporters of Swift have seemed to be as unimpressed by the Times op-ed as the sources who slammed it.

“Call me old fashioned but speculating on people’s sexual orientation and selling own personal theories as facts is not journalism,” wrote one user on social media.

“ The New York Times is so gross for that Taylor Swift article. I can’t believe they faux-intellectualized the same misogyny and speculation that women have been experiencing for centuries,” said another.

Swift personally has yet to publicly comment on the piece.

———