OPINION
The news that Rebel Wilson is in a new relationship with a woman was overshadowed over the weekend by a bizarre, self-inflicted outing controversy at the Sydney Morning Herald.
The SMH's "Private Sydney" gossip columnist Andrew Hornery penned an unbelievably salty column published on Saturday in which he revealed that he had the scoop on Wilson's new same-sex relationship.
But, he said, he made the "big mistake" of emailing her team asking Rebel to confirm the new relationship, giving her a 48-hour deadline to respond.
Wilson then announced the news herself on Instagram, "opting to gazump" Hornery's story (his words) by going public with her girlfriend.
"Considering how bitterly Wilson had complained about poor journalism standards when she successfully sued Woman's Day for defamation, her choice to ignore our discreet, genuine and honest queries was, in our view, underwhelming," Hornery complained.
It was a breathtakingly entitled stance to take, claiming ownership over the reveal of another person's sexuality. In fact, the entire piece simmered with such barely concealed resentment towards Wilson that may go some way to explaining why she didn't trust the writer to reveal such sensitive information and instead opted to announce it herself.
The reaction of those on social media has been furious. And for many queer people, it feels personal; emotional. So many of us have been outed against our will at some point in our lives – it is a terrifying, exposing feeling, and it feels the same whether you're a closeted student trying to make it through high school in one piece or a Hollywood movie star wondering how this might affect your family, your career, your life.
It's bizarre that Hornery and new SMH editor Bevan Shields, both gay men, apparently never stopped to consider this easy-to-predict reaction before publishing the piece.
Hornery reports that this is Rebel's first same-sex relationship. Who knows when, or even if, she wanted to tell the world. But whatever the SMH put to her in that email, it seems she felt she had to come out before they did it for her.
And then, as the outrage made international headlines, came a note from editor Shields.
Not an apology – far from it. It turns out we were all just reading the article wrong. Shields declared that Hornery's piece was "not a standard news story".
"Like other mastheads do every day, we simply asked questions and as standard practice included a deadline for a response. I had made no decision about whether or what to publish, and the Herald's decision about what to do would have been informed by any response Wilson supplied," Shields wrote.
But didn't Hornery himself admit it had been a "big mistake" to even give Wilson a heads-up before running the story?
By the end of this editor's note, one is left with the distinct impression Shields is the one expecting an apology - from anyone who was offended by the article.
Amid all this, Wilson has offered one succinct public comment – responding to one supporter on Twitter who called out the SMH, she wrote that it had been "a very hard situation" but that she was "trying to handle it with grace".
At least somebody is.