Taylor Swift's sexuality became the target of an op-ed published in The New York Times last week, and it raised several eyebrows.

Editor Anna Marks published a 5,000-word op-ed for The New York Times with the headline "Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do." Marks strung together various alleged LGBTQ references weaved into the Grammy winner's songs and performances and suggested that the "Lover" singer had been hinting that she identifies with the queer community.

"In isolation, a single dropped hairpin is perhaps meaningless or accidental, but considered together, they're the unfurling of a ballerina bun after a long performance," Marks wrote.

"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."

Several netizens were not happy with how the "Shake It Off" singer's sexuality was seemingly questioned, with many calling the piece "disgusting." They insisted that Swift was an ally of the LGBTQ+ community as she declared but not a member.

"This is disgusting. Delete this," one commented. Another added, "This is disgusting. It's fan fiction at best. It's [a] speculative invasion and public outing at worst. And it shouldn't be allowed."

"Anna Marks has no right to put these ridiculously invasive, presumptuous, unhinged articles out into the world. What a gross person," a third person opined.

"This essay is a fireable offense -- poorly written, horribly invasive and objectionable in myriad ways. It is both galling and weird that the NYT would publish a speculative piece on someone's gender identity. This is beneath the editorial standards of NYT Opinion. Do Better," a fourth commenter stated.

Meanwhile, some seemingly agreed with the author's point of view. One said Marks perfectly picked up what they had in mind.

"This is so well written. I have been picking up on her hairpin drops for years, and this explains it all so well," one wrote.

A person close to the situation who wished to be anonymous spoke with CNN about the issue. The insider claimed that the op-ed unfairly targeted Swift and wouldn't have been approved if the subject were a male artist whose sexuality had been questioned.

"This article wouldn't have been allowed to be written about Shawn Mendes or any male artist whose sexuality has been questioned by fans," the source said.

"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.'"

Meanwhile, Marks was seemingly aware of the questionable assertions and preemptively addressed the critics in the op-ed.

"I know that discussing the potential of a star's queerness before a formal declaration of identity feels, to some, too salacious and gossip-fueled to be worthy of discussion," Marks wrote.

"I share many of these reservations. But the stories that dominate our collective imagination shape what our culture permits artists and their audiences to say and be. Every time an artist signals queerness, and that transmission falls on deaf ears, that signal dies. Recognizing the possibility of queerness -- while being conscious of the difference between possibility and certainty -- keeps that signal alive."

Tags
Taylor Swift, LGBTQ