Please consider registering
Guest
sp_LogInOut Log Insp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_Feed sp_TopicIcon
Was John Lennon Bisexual?
18 August 2022
10.58am
Avatar
MattWatchingWheels
London Palladium
Members
Forum Posts: 152
Member Since:
17 March 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

castironshore said </strong
Spot on.

I’d also add that John (and also to an extent paul) were very adept at tailoring their responses for the needs of whoever they were talking to. 

I reckon the other Beatles knew what was happening between John and Brian very early on, he wasn’t "groomed" at all, he willingly and happily entered into a relationship with him that was exclusive to the others.   

As I say: John was still an emotionally driven person. Just because he was over 18 does not disqualify him from being groomed/leadinto a situation he shouldn’t’ve been in, and yes, he probably thought it was normal and enjoyed it. It’s not right behavior by modern standards though. That’s a fact.

But, lto bring this back around, like I also said: Brian wasn’t trying to hurt John and I don’t think any of them had any harm that in their minds toward each other. John could joke, but anyone who knows john knows his joking isnt meant to be taken serious. My point therefore stands: They were each toxic to each other, though unknowingly. It’s still wrong, on both ends, but there ya go

19 August 2022
6.54pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4966
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It totally makes my day when I see new discussion in this thread. I love speculating about John and seeing new information. I guess that makes me “John curious”?

You can’t apply today’s standards to yesterday. In the 60s and 70s older teens were treated as adults. Also, it’s ridiculous that people are now claiming consenting adults can be groomed. Either stick with the age of consent or legally change the definition of a child to be older.

Also, I don’t think Brian would have invited John were he not bi. Yoko recently admitted he was bi, but she said he had never found a partner that met his standards. Well, I have read accounts online from at least one person who claimed he had sex with John.

As far as the Brian / John handjob, John claimed it wasn’t consummated and a handjob did not count as sex in the 60s, so he would be right. The definition of sex changed in the public consciousness around the time of the Clinton / Lewinski scandal. A study showed that when Clinton claimed “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” the majority agreed with him. I can produce a link if anyone is interested. Oral and handjobs were considered “messing around” and not the same as sex.

Remember also that John claimed he beat up Bob Wooler because he was “afraid of the fag” in him, which is basically an outright admission.

As far as Paul goes, you can’t trust anything he says.

"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney 

20 August 2022
4.45am
forn
London Palladium
Members
Forum Posts: 116
Member Since:
4 September 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
623sp_Permalink sp_Print

MattWatchingWheels saidI think it’s pretty much a given that something untoward happened by today’s standards. Even if Pete were lying (Which again, we would need to prove) There’s enough from John’s own mouth that can lead us to believe John was pretty much targeted for seduction by Brian.
  

It would be something untoward by today’s standards, but it didn’t happen today.  Today any sexual behavior involving someone who holds power or authority over the other is considered inappropriate at least.  But those weren’t the standards at the time, in the ’60s.  What always comes to my mind when this sort of thing comes up is Jerry Lewis’ classic move The Nutty Professor.  It’s a love story between a university professor and his female student.  Heads would explode these days.  When they did the remake with Eddie Murphy, they changed the student to a graduate.  

It’s funny how homosexuality is more accepted in the current culture, but the grooming behavior is now considered unacceptable.  I would also say that although Brian was John’s manager, John in this case actually had a lot of power over Brian.  Although a lot of this came from John appealing to Brian as a “rough boy”.

20 August 2022
7.21am
Avatar
meaigs
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 649
Member Since:
23 January 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
624sp_Permalink sp_Print

It’s worth noting that changing standards and norms are not arbitrary. Just because something was accepted in the past, doesn’t mean it was actually okay. Many things have become unacceptable because the people who are hurt by those things are taken more seriously now than they were in the past.

Take your example of the professor and student. I’m sure there have been happy marriages that have resulted from such affairs, but the power dynamic between a teacher and student creates the potential for abuse. Many more women have been traumatised and bullied out of academia than have settled happily with their professors. As a society we have decided that the potential for abuse is high enough that we should put in measures to protect students. The potential for abuse was always there, but it wasn’t recognised. 

We’re naming and discussing things that were always there, and hopefully progressing to a society where the vulnerable are more protected, and everyone’s needs and concerns are taken seriously.

Side note: Grooming behaviour has a victim, but homosexual relationships don’t (at least not more often than heterosexual relationships).

My point is we ought to try to be nuanced in our discussion of past behaviour that would be called abuse today. The social mores of the time are relevant, but not the whole story. People were still hurt and even traumatised by those things, sometimes more so by not having a name for why it hurt them. And the perpetrators did something wrong, even if their peers would have approved, and they themselves never understood it as wrong.

My hot take is that after the Beatles split they went down the paths of spiritualism, solipsism, alcoholism, and Paul McCartney

                                                                                                             -- Jason Carty, Nothing is Real podcast

20 August 2022
8.57am
Avatar
MattWatchingWheels
London Palladium
Members
Forum Posts: 152
Member Since:
17 March 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Expert Textpert said
It totally makes my day when I see new discussion in this thread. I love speculating about John and seeing new information. I guess that makes me “John curious”?

You can’t apply today’s standards to yesterday. In the 60s and 70s older teens were treated as adults. Also, it’s ridiculous that people are now claiming consenting adults can be groomed. Either stick with the age of consent or legally change the definition of a child to be older.

Also, I don’t think Brian would have invited John were he not bi. Yoko recently admitted he was bi, but she said he had never found a partner that met his standards. Well, I have read accounts online from at least one person who claimed he had sex with John.

As far as the Brian / John handjob, John claimed it wasn’t consummated and a handjob did not count as sex in the 60s, so he would be right. The definition of sex changed in the public consciousness around the time of the Clinton / Lewinski scandal. A study showed that when Clinton claimed “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” the majority agreed with him. I can produce a link if anyone is interested. Oral and handjobs were considered “messing around” and not the same as sex.

Remember also that John claimed he beat up Bob Wooler because he was “afraid of the fag” in him, which is basically an outright admission.

As far as Paul goes, you can’t trust anything he says.  

I have to disagree with you on some of these points, EP. Grooming can happen at any age if the person is emotionally vulnerable and able to be exploited. A person can be a victim regardless of age, gender or social standing, and I think it’s absolutely fair to say that John was targeted and put in an uncomfortable sexual situation. Yes, the fact that it was a different time has to be taken into account, and certainly I don’t think Eppy had any “Evil” intent, but ask yourself: If the Beatles existed today as a modern group, would we smile on such a scenario? No. We wouldn’t. Because we know better now and we understand that that behavior can lead to worse things. Therefore, Eppy’s intent at the time doesn’t matter. He could have seriously gotten John into some major trouble if it ever came out fully, what he tried to do. Not to mention that if we believe Pete’s account at least, John had to put up with a lot of embarrassment and shame from it. Enough to rationalize is with “Well, he couldn’t help it” and…that’s…textbook evidence of trauma. Trust me, I’ve been there. With that said, we can look back on it and see that behavior as wrong, regardless of the time period. It doesn’t necessarily mean that Brian is/was a monster though, as there is a difference between willfully bad behavior and ignorance. I’m only saying that it doesn’t make what he did okay or innocent either.

That’s only my opinion though.

20 August 2022
6.46pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4966
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Well, the incident almost ruined The Beatles and could have got John and Brian thrown in jail. John could have been thrown in jail on two counts, the homosexual incident and almost killing Bob Wooler for trying to expose it at Paul’s birthday party. My feeling, however, is that Brian did not use his power as a manager to control a helpless Beatle, That sounds stupid to me…people today have gone bonkers with their need to police morality. And as you can see from the story about the Wooler comment and John’s fear of exposure, nothing has changed. Morality was being policed then too, just in a different (and not any better) way.

"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney 

21 August 2022
11.25am
castironshore
Royal Command Performance
Members
Forum Posts: 225
Member Since:
12 May 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
627sp_Permalink sp_Print

To a large extent the Beatles embodied Brians own sexual desires, it’s basically why he became obsessed with them in the first place. It’s a very, very old story in show business of managers, agents and artists etc hiding their sexuality in the industry in this way. 

Expert Texpert is right, the incident could have derailed the Beatles career (Mccartney was furious with John) but Brian was able to influence the media and get them to play it down with the “sorry i socked you Bob” narrative. That was his strength for the band rather than in the cutthroat world of record deals and merchandising where he lost them tens of millions. 

I don’t believe John was being groomed at all. He had already experimented sexually with Stuart in Hamburg (as recalled to Derek Taylor) and i think a part of him was rather excited by Brians pursuit of him and he certainly didn’t do anything to dissuade it. In fact i’d go so far as to say that Brian loved John much more than the “Beatles” and indeed assured his Aunt that he would always look after John first. And he meant it. 

I’d imagine the other band members knew as well, they were all extremely savvy people. I think it’s to the bands great credit the way they accepted Brian and let John be himself. I dislike the phrase “gay leanings” though. John was a bisexual man and Brian was a homosexual and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

The following people thank castironshore for this post:

KyleKartan
28 August 2022
3.35pm
Avatar
MattWatchingWheels
London Palladium
Members
Forum Posts: 152
Member Since:
17 March 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Im still of the opinion you are both defending something very wrong and not worth the effort it takes to defend, in all honesty. Though i see no point in fighting you on it.

And no: I do not think it’s “Bonkers” to believe differently than you do on the subject. I find that attitude condescending, to tell the truth. Haven’t we evolved beyond calling each other “Snowflakes” by now?

28 August 2022
9.30pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4966
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

MattWatchingWheels said
Im still of the opinion you are both defending something very wrong and not worth the effort it takes to defend, in all honesty. Though i see no point in fighting you on it.

And no: I do not think it’s “Bonkers” to believe differently than you do on the subject. I find that attitude condescending, to tell the truth. Haven’t we evolved beyond calling each other “Snowflakes” by now?

  

I don’t use the term “snowflake”. I’m an anarchist. I’m not on board with the new moral Puritanism and authoritarianism from the left. Both sides are fascist. I believe we should abolish political parties and be sovereign over our own bodies and make our own choices.

"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney 

29 August 2022
2.54pm
castironshore
Royal Command Performance
Members
Forum Posts: 225
Member Since:
12 May 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
630sp_Permalink sp_Print

MattWatchingWheels said
Im still of the opinion you are both defending something very wrong and not worth the effort it takes to defend, in all honesty. Though i see no point in fighting you on it.

And no: I do not think it’s “Bonkers” to believe differently than you do on the subject. I find that attitude condescending, to tell the truth. Haven’t we evolved beyond calling each other “Snowflakes” by now?

  

I don’t think so, with respect.

I just agree with ET in that i find the idea of Epstein grooming or exploiting John as ludicrous. John was far from helpless in this situation. Quite the opposite, if anything he was the one controlling and bullying Brian, reducing him to mush one minute then destroying him by ignoring him or with his brutal comments the next.

I suspect John was playing out some kind of psychodrama with Brian, and he finally recognised his role in his destruction too late. Hence his terrified demeanour when told of his death. Perhaps also because it was at a point where he probably needed him most.

The following people thank castironshore for this post:

Ahhh Girl
29 August 2022
5.13pm
castironshore
Royal Command Performance
Members
Forum Posts: 225
Member Since:
12 May 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
631sp_Permalink sp_Print

Finally i should mention Simon Napier Bells book “you don’t have to say you love me” where the impresario talks about his relationship with Brian shortly before his death in some length. 

Brian tells him of his distrust of the maharishi and how he never minded the bands “wives, girlfriends, even other boyfriends” being around but that he regarded the maharishi as taking especially John away from him. 

He also tells him about the first time he kissed john “after being crazy about him for ages”

It suggests to me that the traditional narrative of some experimentation in Spain and that was that is bogus. 

29 August 2022
6.55pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4966
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

castironshore said 

He also tells him about the first time he kissed john “after being crazy about him for ages”

It suggests to me that the traditional narrative of some experimentation in Spain and that was that is bogus. 

  

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. I kind of wish we had John around to guide the narrative because I feel in today’s climate he would be more open. Unfortunately we get Paul and Yoko (don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they are alive. But they both distort narrative for their own ends in different ways).

"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney 

29 August 2022
7.16pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4966
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
633sp_Permalink sp_Print

@Ahhh Girl would it be too much trouble to change the thread title to “Was John Lennon Bisexual?”

The following people thank Expert Textpert for this post:

meaigs, Richard

"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney 

29 August 2022
8.07pm
Avatar
meaigs
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 649
Member Since:
23 January 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
634sp_Permalink sp_Print

Expert Textpert said
@Ahhh Girl would it be too much trouble to change the thread title to “Was John Lennon Bisexual?”

  

I second that request

The following people thank meaigs for this post:

Richard

My hot take is that after the Beatles split they went down the paths of spiritualism, solipsism, alcoholism, and Paul McCartney

                                                                                                             -- Jason Carty, Nothing is Real podcast

29 August 2022
8.49pm
Avatar
Richard
North of England
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4047
Member Since:
6 May 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

meaigs said

Expert Textpert said

@Ahhh Girl would it be too much trouble to change the thread title to “Was John Lennon Bisexual?”

I second that request

I third that request

And in the end

The love you take is equal to the love you make

 

uk-flag-v-small-3.png

29 August 2022
10.51pm
Avatar
Ahhh Girl
sailing on a winedark open sea
Moderator

Moderators

Members

Reviewers
Forum Posts: 21040
Member Since:
20 August 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
636sp_Permalink sp_Print

Done. john-lennon-salute_gif

I emailed Joe about changing the URL.

The following people thank Ahhh Girl for this post:

Expert Textpert, meaigs
29 August 2022
11.13pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4966
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
637sp_Permalink sp_Print

Ahhh Girl said
Done. john-lennon-salute_gif

I emailed Joe about changing the URL.

  

Thanks. It’s more accurate this way and I know bisexual people sometimes feel underrepresented or misunderstood.

The following people thank Expert Textpert for this post:

meaigs

"If you're ever in the shit, grab my tit.” —Paul McCartney 

30 August 2022
3.16pm
castironshore
Royal Command Performance
Members
Forum Posts: 225
Member Since:
12 May 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Expert Textpert said

castironshore said 

 

He also tells him about the first time he kissed john “after being crazy about him for ages”

It suggests to me that the traditional narrative of some experimentation in Spain and that was that is bogus. 

  

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. I kind of wish we had John around to guide the narrative because I feel in today’s climate he would be more open. Unfortunately we get Paul and Yoko (don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they are alive. But they both distort narrative for their own ends in different ways).

  

Agreed.

It’s really frustrating how paul uses “we” as the “beatles” to cover things that were explicitly regarding John and him.  I suspect it probably drove George nuts. Whatever happens Paul has decided to keep his secrets despite Yoko throwing the odd hand grenade out there. As is his right. 

I still think it boils down to John wanting Paul to fight Yoko for him in the same way he did with Stu in Hamburg. That was just the way he was wired. But that would have meant asking what John wanted from him and vice versa and instead Paul didn’t go there. That self reliant strength Paul developed over the years ended up isolating him from his band and his best friend.

So much of the Beatles story is a tragedy.    

Forum Timezone: Europe/London
Most Users Ever Online: 700
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 1
Top Posters:
Starr Shine?: 16104
Ron Nasty: 12191
Zig: 9832
50yearslate: 8743
Necko: 7976
AppleScruffJunior: 7555
parlance: 7111
mr. Sun king coming together: 6403
Mr. Kite: 6147
trcanberra: 6064
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 88
Members: 2787
Moderators: 5
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 44
Topics: 5144
Posts: 370344
Newest Members:
Lovely Rita, rubber ringo soul, SheSaidSheSaid, CECFan64, CECFan89
Moderators: Joe: 5279, meanmistermustard: 24683, Ahhh Girl: 21040, Beatlebug: 17746, The Hole Got Fixed: 8403
Administrators: Joe: 5279