Log In
Register
7.09pm
18 April 2013
Offline
Here are some reasons why I wonder:
1. John writes about gay sex several times in “Skywriting by Word of Mouth.”
2. In the Norman biography, there is the story of how John was once overheard “pleading in a submissive way” with Paul in the studio, and how Paul was referred to by others in the studio as John’s “princess.” There was also a rumor that John had propositioned Paul and he said no.
3. A story by someone on the Internet (I forget who) who hung out with John and John asked him, “Are you gay?” and then acted disappointed when he said no.
4. John joked that Paul was an “estranged fiance” at the Elton John concert in 1974.
5. John’s favorite place in Hamburg was the bar with the drag queens, where he “felt at home.”
6. John confessed to Yoko that he liked her because she looked like a man in drag.
7. The holiday with Brian Epstein.
There is definitely cause to wonder. Anyone care to comment? And I’m not trying to start an argument or offend anyone–I’m just examining what I’ve seen and read from various sources.
….oh, and we can’t forget 8. He almost killed Bob Wooler for joking that he was gay. That’s kind of a red flag.
and 9. He told Yoko that he wanted to be loved more by the gay crowd.
and finally 10. When it was suggested that John have other sexual partners (prior to the Lost Weekend), men were brought up (jokingly, supposedly) as a possibility for John.
"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney
7.26pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline It doesn’t matter to me either way, but it seems to me you have answered your own question.
Comedian Ron White once said, “We’re all gay, buddy. It’s just to what degree are you gay.”
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
7.32pm
18 April 2013
Offline Zig said
It doesn’t matter to me either way, but it seems to me you have answered your own question.Comedian Ron White once said, “We’re all gay, buddy. It’s just to what degree are you gay.”
That’s actually the way I see it. A lot of people identify more as hetero or gay but actually lean the other way sometimes.
"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney
10.09pm
3 May 2012
Offline I don’t think any of your points are strong enough to make me think that he was. Maybe, but I don’t think probably. I love him either way.
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
10.38pm
16 August 2012
Offline I think it’s probably safe to say that John had a healthy curiosity. You have to remember that it wasn’t like today, where someone could use internet porn to satisfy their interest and feelings.
So to answer your question, I’d suggest that John had a long-term “curiosity” and at some points had experimented with it. I think by all of the points you made (and well-documented proof that many men are like this), it’s a pretty safe assumption.
E is for 'Ergent'.
11.00pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline No idea and I don’t care if he did.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Richard"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
11.41pm
24 July 2013
Offline What about 12: a song about a Beautiful Boy?
12.16am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
piston broke said
What about 12: a song about a Beautiful Boy?
I find it rather objectionable that you would suggest, even if jokingly (and I can’t tell), that a song written by a father for and about his five-year-old son should be considered as another clue to John’s sexuality.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Oudis, The Walrus, Mr. Kite, Egroeg Evoli, Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<, Beatlebug, WeepingAtlasCedars, MadisonMcCartney2267, Richard"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
1.38am
1 November 2012
Offline There’s that scene in the movie Help ! where the four Beatles are driving out on a road in the middle of nowhere on location in the Bahamas, they get lost, and Paul gets out of the car and starts crawling on the road away from them with his butt in the air, and John is looking down at him rather smilingly…
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
7.11am
17 January 2013
Offline Funny Paper said
There’s that scene in the movie Help ! where the four Beatles are driving out on a road in the middle of nowhere on location in the Bahamas, they get lost, and Paul gets out of the car and starts crawling on the road away from them with his butt in the air, and John is looking down at him rather smilingly…
I instantly thought of this gif from Help ! I saw earlier when I read this..
On the gay thing: I think he was probably just curious. It’s not an outrageous assumption, and if he was a little that way, then good for him. Love is Love is Love. Nothing wrong with that. Just read some “McLennon” clues. Seriously, there are lots… some are ridiculous, and some are pretty valid in my opinion.
"Please don't bring your banjo back, I know where it's been.. I wasn't hardly gone a day, when it became the scene.. Banjos! Banjos! All the time, I can't forget that tune.. and if I ever see another banjo, I'm going out and buy a big balloon!"
5.11pm
9 July 2013
Offline I agree with all that it doesn’t matter….but I admit I have wondered about it myself (I wonder about all sorts of things). That list of clues is excellent. We have to agree it is fairly well-documented that Brian had a “crush” on John and that was part of the reason he wanted to represent them. And, let’s not forget Stu Sutcliffe. There is far more to that relationship than meets the eye. I think he probably experimented, and who knows what he did on that Lost Weekend. No, it doesn’t matter unless you really want to get to know who John really was, and I think all of the things we mentioned are part of who he was. He was one confused man especially in his early years when he formed the Quarrymen. I can’t imagine he had a “crush” (my word) on Paul, though…he was too intimidated by Paul’s talent and his fear that Paul would be or become better than he.
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
5.46pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline LongHairedLady said
Love is Love is Love.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
6.38pm
1 November 2012
Offline
Zig said
LongHairedLady said
Love is Love is Love.
Apropos of this, I love the title of Milton Berle’s 1987 memoir.
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
7.03pm
18 April 2013
Offline mccartneyalarm said
I agree with all that it doesn’t matter….but I admit I have wondered about it myself (I wonder about all sorts of things). That list of clues is excellent. We have to agree it is fairly well-documented that Brian had a “crush” on John and that was part of the reason he wanted to represent them. And, let’s not forget Stu Sutcliffe. There is far more to that relationship than meets the eye. I think he probably experimented, and who knows what he did on that Lost Weekend. No, it doesn’t matter unless you really want to get to know who John really was, and I think all of the things we mentioned are part of who he was. He was one confused man especially in his early years when he formed the Quarrymen. I can’t imagine he had a “crush” (my word) on Paul, though…he was too intimidated by Paul’s talent and his fear that Paul would be or become better than he.
True, and he also beat up Stu, according to a story I read…I’ve always wondered if there was some “secret passion” there somewhere that led to the angry outburst.
I think Elton John also gave John a drag queen name–Catherine, or something like that. And there is that footage of John dancing with a drag queen while Elton takes polaroids.
There are some stories here…I would cut and paste, but there are some bad words.
"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney
9.13pm
9 July 2013
Offline I remember that John always thought that his fight with Stu was the cause of the brain hemorage (sp?) from which Stu died. He blamed himself for his death. He certainly loved Stu (the movie “Backbeat” is excellent at portraying that suggestion). John was so forgiving of the fact that Stu had no talent. He just wanted him to be in the band with him. I know John didn’t know what to make of a lot of his feelings, not the least of which is love…which he got from the feelings of his abandonment as a child. I often wonder if, had he lived, he would have eventualy gotten over that. You are right about Elton John and the gay name. I had forgotten about that!
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
2.56am
8 November 2012
Offline mccartneyalarm said
I can’t imagine he had a “crush” (my word) on Paul, though…he was too intimidated by Paul’s talent and his fear that Paul would be or become better than he.
I don’t get the connection. You can have a crush on someone you find intimidating, or perhaps a better description might be awe-inspiring.
parlance
3.57am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline mccartneyalarm said
And, let’s not forget Stu Sutcliffe. There is far more to that relationship than meets the eye… I can’t imagine he had a “crush” (my word) on Paul, though…he was too intimidated by Paul’s talent and his fear that Paul would be or become better than he.
I personally don’t buy this “Was John gay?” idea. But, supposing he was, and I’m willing to play Devil’s advocate, there is one big flaw in this particular argument. John was always much more intimidated by Stuart’s talent than he was by Paul’s. Paul he saw as a friendly rival, someone who (certainly in the early days – which is when any “crush” would have formed) was his musical equal. However, you get the John-Stuart relationship totally wrong when you say, “John was so forgiving of the fact that Stu had no talent.”
John always had the two sides to him – the musician and the artist. Stuart was the most talented artist that John had ever met, so talented that John knew he would never be as good as him. John excused Stuart’s “adequate” bass playing because he would do anything to be close to the talented artist. If John was intimidated by anyone because of their talent, it was Stuart.
Look at how often John dumped close friends out of the Quarrymen because he considered they were not good enough musicians, yet Stuart he would not say a word against because he was such a talented painter and his best friend. He was in awe of/intimidated by Stuart in a way that he never was of/by Paul.
If there was more to his relationship with Stuart than meets the eye, than it is a logical assumption – if you believe this kind of thing – that there was more to his relationship with Paul than meets the eye since Paul was a much less frightening prospect…
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
6.14am
17 January 2013
Offline Expert Textpert said
True, and he also beat up Stu, according to a story I read…I’ve always wondered if there was some “secret passion” there somewhere that led to the angry outburst.I think Elton John also gave John a drag queen name–Catherine, or something like that. And there is that footage of John dancing with a drag queen while Elton takes polaroids.
There are some stories here…I would cut and paste, but there are some bad words.
Then there was also that time that Paul got into a physical fight with Stu onstage, which according to Paul was the only physical fight he had really been in. He was jealous of John and Stu’s relationship, whatever it may have been. Whether it was just friendship or if it was deeper than that, I think it definitely made Paul jealous.
On that same subject, there is the other story I’ve been looking for in my Anthology book but I can’t find it because the book is huge, but that is where I read it: John was messed up on drugs, Preludin I believe, and Paul was in bed with a “bird”, sometime when they were in Hamburg. John came in the room and cut up all of her clothes with scissors. I always thought that despite him being on drugs, it seemed like a weird jealousy thing…
I did find this quote while I was searching, while Paul was talking about their sexual experiences in Hamburg:
“That’s why I’ve always found very strange the theory that John was gay. Because over the fifteen years of sharing rooms, sharing our lives, not one of us has an incident to relate of catching John with a boy. I would have though that kind of thing would be more prevalent, and John’s inhibitions were certainly free when he was drunk.”
"Please don't bring your banjo back, I know where it's been.. I wasn't hardly gone a day, when it became the scene.. Banjos! Banjos! All the time, I can't forget that tune.. and if I ever see another banjo, I'm going out and buy a big balloon!"
4.49pm
9 July 2013
Offline Good observation about John being jealous of Stu’s talent…you are very right…John was deeply jealous of Stu’s artistic talent. I forgot about that cuz I was focusing on the musical side of John. Paul was annoyed with Stu’s musical abilities, but I’m not so sure Paul was jealous of Stu and John, unless it was over the fact that Stu and John were so close that John always stood up for Stu giving Paul no leverage. Paul wanted to make it big-time once they got to Hamburg, and Paul felt Stu was clearly holding them back. Stu began not showing up for gigs and such when he became more involved with Astrid. I believe (but I’m just speculating) that the fight Paul had with Stu was over the fact that Stu’s limited contribution to the band was the cause of a record company rep walking out on an impromptu “audition” in Hamburg. I believe the fight followed that incident. I don’t think it would be fair to call John gay or even Bi…I think he experimented and his emotions being in such a chaotic mess, he reacted to people and feelings impulsively at times.
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
11.35am
3 May 2012
Offline John was messed up on drugs, Preludin I believe, and Paul was in bed with a “bird”, sometime when they were in Hamburg. John came in the room and cut up all of her clothes with scissors. I always thought that despite him being on drugs, it seemed like a weird jealousy thing…
It does seem like the kind of thing someone jealous would do upon finding their partner in bed with somebody else, but it could have another explanation. Maybe Paul was meant to be on stage or something? Do we know the exact circumstances of this event?
I don’t think John was infatuated with Paul otherwise he would have tried it on at least once (we don’t know for sure that he ever did). Nothing stopped him with anyone else, did it? I think he loved him in a brotherly way, and he admired him. I don’t think there was anything sexual in it.
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
