Yes. You should have seen my mother when she figured out that Liberace was gay. As if Liberace wasn't the gayest person ever.

I knew Liberace was gay before I knew what gay was. Just like google could spot cats in videos.

Liberace appears to have had a homosexual relationship, but he himself denied it. "Gay" to me implies a person who openly embraces a lifestyle including exclusively homosexual sex; under such a definition he was not gay. Indeed he won a libel case against a newspaper and stated he wasn't homosexual and had never taken part in homosexual acts. His supposed live-in lover also failed to show he was homosexual.

There's evidence to suggest he was [also] interested in women. Wikipedia doesn't mention it but a BBC article, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22099082, says he was engaged. Of course that could have been a way to court interest from [female] fans; but it seems equally others could have lied about the extent of his homosexuality. Often people mistake flamboyant-camp for homosexual, it's possible to have either without the other.

The whole Wikipedia page for Liberace appears to be an attempt to force him in to a mold that he refused repeatedly. Perhaps he was asexual as some reports hint, or maybe bi-.

Well, I do, because I was told by older people and it makes sense. Why?

Because (in the US at least), gay people started more openly coming out in the 1970s, with large increases in the 80s as well. So that's 30-40 years of gays becoming increasingly open.

Not to mention before that, there were people, even in the small town south, that everyone knew was gay but just didn't discuss in open terms.

Now it's true the cultural stereotype for "gay" was the Village People or Liberace or whatever, but a large number of people knew ordinary gay people as well.

Of course, even today, and even in a place as open as San Francisco, I suspect most everyone knows more gay people than they think they do. I know that's true, in fact. A lot of people just never talk about it.