Now think for a second why that might be considered a negative framing of effeminate homosexuality.
And I know your key point is that you don't believe he's inferring that, but I disagree. Heck, this is an except from the paragraph before the one I originally posted from the interview:
At the end of the day, I just feel that he looks at the fact that he escaped the possibility of being effeminate as some sort of blessing, and while I respect your opinion, I still think that's kinda shitty.
I did consider and acknowledge what the potential negatives in the comments were that prompted your disappointed post to start with. I think considering is all that can be done for his opinions here though, rather than what I think is concluding negatively without him actually giving a clear opinion or conversation on that subject specifically.
I get that his wording, if taken negatively, would imply that he is
'not one of those effeminate gays and he gets what people dislike about them, so therefore he is likable' and would only be damaging people who are actually subjected to similar and worse criticisms casting them as lesser men, in addition to the same defamation his own status as a man faces from society just for being gay. I don't disagree that if those are his feelings and he does mean to position himself as somehow of better male character in that light, he's absolutely in the wrong. But I don't agree that it can be confirmed from the nature and content of the comments, as they seem open to elaboration beyond his public perception as an actor, whether it is positive or negative.
As to what is wrong with going to theatre school, I don't think he clearly felt it was wrong or that it is strictly an interest of effeminate types, as he doesn't try and dissociate from it. I think he says he likes the opportunities his upbringing helped afford him. Knowing that he likes how he is now as an actor in both gay and straight roles, he does not feel confident that he would be in the same professional position or at the same public advantage to engage that interest if he had been socialized as he had planned. He gets more of the roles he personally hopes for, in his apparent opinion, because he has both his openness to play gay characters now, and because he has the advantageous conventional masculinity for the industry.
I get that it isn't a nice idea that he could get less opportunities as an actor if he were the effeminate theatre student, but since he isn't and it is benefitting his career, he seemingly appreciates how that has positioned him to fulfill his interests. That doesn't mean he feels he deserves a benefit and thinks effeminate gays are rightfully perceived differently than his satisfied self. Could he feel that? Yes, but I don't see it here. Even the tap-dancing comment could easily be referring to what Tovey's father imagined and claimed of the education, and not Tovey meaning anything more than he indeed was in some ways out to experience a less conventional education in favor of a strictly theatrical pursuit as his father worried.
He seems to think he could have missed his ideal career if he had been socialized differently and ended up more effeminate. I think he is saying more about the industry and his career in those brief comments than anything firmly about whether being effeminate or not is his problem, if his career weren't likely influenced. There's definitely still room for him to elaborate positively (or negatively), even if the benefit he is referring to comes from somewhat negative industry and social conventions.
