I don't know the origin of the stereotype of the "Latin lover," a man who can win the heart of any woman with a sultry smile, but Fernando Lamas is a good bet.
The celebrity died in 1982, but his presence was so over-the-top that he's still being parodied today, in the characters of Fernando on Saturday Night Live and "The Most Interesting Man in the World" in Dos Equis beer commercials.
He wasn't particularly hunky, but he was handsome, suave, and sophisticated, the last of the old-style romantic leads. Unfortunately, he was increasingly anachronistic in the era of Hollywood beefcake,when gay talent agent Henry Willson was flooding the market with massive pecs and bulging biceps. By the late 1950s, Fernando was relegated to the wasteland of guest roles on tv Westerns.
But, like the Gabor sisters, his fame came not from his acting so much as for his hetero-romances: four marriages, innumerable liaisons, flings, and affairs.
Not a lot of homoerotic buddy-bonding in real life, either. He preferred the company of women, even when he wasn't sleeping with them.
What do you say about an actor who spends all of his time off camera with women? Right -- you say he's gay. Because of course, heterosexual men can't stand being with women.
The conservative Republican was not pleased with the gay rumors so he "disproved" them by sleeping with the rumor-mongers' wives.
He's identified as bisexual on some internet lists, but no one is naming names.
His son Lorenzo started off his career playing gay-vague characters.
Lamas was good looking and a sexy Latin lover type in the 1950s-like a lot of Latino men of his generation he would never admit to any gay experience. So why knows for sure.
ReplyDeleteWhen he was on broadway w/Ethel Merman in "Happy Hunting", he had his pants re-cut to show off his famous male member. The Merm was not amused.
ReplyDeleteEthel wrote a book about herself and she mentioned Lamas always wear tight pant and show off his penis size. Of course, latins! He has the beefy thing is penis!
DeleteIt is credible that he would have had gay liaisons if he wanted them, whatever he may have been willing to admit. But there does not seem to be much if any "evidence."
ReplyDeleteThat's the question with historical figures in general: what constitutes evidence? We rarely have journals in which they describe same-sex activity, and when we do, as when Walt Whitman kept a detailed account of inviting me to spend the night and kissing and caressing them, historians say "Well, he never mentions actually having sex with them, so..."
Delete