Please consider registering
Guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_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
McLennon
3 June 2018
9.35pm
Avatar
JohnLovesPaul
A Beginning
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
3 June 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I'm sorry. I'm just really confused. I've only been a Beatlemaniac for about a year now. I've already read enough books and heard enough stories to definitely believe that John and Paul might've been in a secret relationship. Even if they weren't in a relationship (since Paul swears that nothing ever happened and that they're both straight, even though John has mentioned several times in public that he's bi), it's undeniably clear that based on all the things John has said about Paul, and all the songs he's confirmed were about Paul, it should be clear to anyone that at least it was John who was in love with Paul. However, the reason I'm confused, is that, on this site, I've met tons of people who said they were 'die-hard beatlemaniacs', but said that McLennon was a joke, and that people should stop saying it's real and making terrible fanfics. Is there anybody who can tell me why these people are oblivious to the fact that there was at least a little romance between Lennon and McCartney? And if you're one of the people who deny it, can you explain why you think it wasn't a thing?

4 June 2018
2.09am
Avatar
meanmistermustard
Here when I am. Not when I am not.
Moderator
Members

Reviewers


Moderators
Forum Posts: 22279
Member Since:
1 May 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

What are the facts that show John and Paul did have some romance, and I don't mean taking a John comment and interpreting it to suit the outcome? 

"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris) 

"Don't make your love suffer insecurities; Trade the baggage of self to set another one free" ('Paper Skin' - Kendall Payne)

4 June 2018
8.14pm
Avatar
JohnLovesPaul
A Beginning
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
3 June 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Well, first, before I even start, I'd just like to point out all the photos that show love. Such as John gazing dreamily, or staring strangely at Paul. I know, there's not definite proof, but DAMN some of them are romantic af. (And I'm not talking about edited pictures where they're leaning on each other lovingly or kissing each other, because those are obviously fake)

 

So there are some things that convince me they were together, or at least John was madly in love with Paul, just a lot of little things, like you know, maybe, all of these things below:

 

 

John getting tons of money for his birthday and instead of using it to take Cynthia or Mimi to Spain (turned out to be Paris), he instantly invited Paul [And I know you could say that it was because they were very close friends, but still, why wouldn't he take his girlfriend to a romantic place on his birthday?]

 

The fact that they shared a bed in Paris, Paul took pictures of John sleeping in their bed, and Paul took a particular picture of John sitting in the room's only bed where John seems to not be wearing anything from the waist down [And I know you might be asking 'if they wanted to keep their relationship a secret, why would Paul take a picture of John half-naked?' Well, Paul either thought nobody would ever see it, or nobody would notice John's 'hem-hem' nudity]

 

Them buying cats for each other named Pyramus and Thisbe [Could obviously just be a random thing, but I wanted to include it because its cute]

 

John was always being rude to all of Paul's girlfriends/girls he was having flings with. Not to mention that time where he cut up the clothes of a girl Paul was sleeping with once, and called her a whore.

 

"Dear Friend" was a song written by Paul about John. In the lyrics, he says "I'm in love with a friend of mine" [One could say that Paul is just saying that he loves him, but then wouldn't he say "I love a friend of mine" rather than "I'm in love", which seems like a big difference between platonic and romantic]

 

John's songs "Real Love " and "Stepping Out" were originally one song called "Real Life" in which Lennon sings "Was I just dreaming, was it only yesterday? I used to hold you in my arms." [I know you could say that this could be about anybody, but in my opinion when John uses the word 'yesterday' he does it to show who exactly he's talking about]

 

In an interview where John interviewed himself for Andy Warhol's magazine. He talks to himself with him being both the questioner and the answerer.

 

Q- It is trendy to be bisexual and you're usually 'keeping up with the Jones', haven't you ever...there was talk about you and Paul...

A- Oh, I thought it was about me and Brian Epstein...anyway, I'm saving all the juice for my own version of "The Real Fab Four Beatles Story" etc., etc. 

Q- It seems like you're saving quite a lot for when you're forty...

A- Yes, there might be nothing better to do, though I don't believe it.

[The way he states it makes it seem like there WAS something between him and Paul. Also I cry almost every time I read this, because he never even got a chance to write what I'm sure would've been a mind-blowing and very revealing book because some psychotic messed-up homophobic radical Christian named Mark David Chapman decided to kill this wonderful man]

 

The way that Paul calls John things like 'love', 'babe', 'baby', 'Johnny', which seem very much like pet names, and the fact that a lot of people who worked at Apple called Paul 'John's princess'. [They could obviously be teasing him, but it seems like Paul and John never minded it, so that's kind of odd]

 

The bracelet that Paul always wears that he says has 'close sentimental value' is almost absolutely something John bought for him on their trip to Paris. The reason I believe this is because it showed up in the early 60s, and if it's of 'close sentimental value', this undeniably either means it's from John. Based on the fact that he still wears it to this day, i'd assume it's not something from Jane. So, John got him a bracelet that he tries to wear almost every single day? Sure, it could just be a really strong friendship...but I see a giving of jewelry to someone special to you, and then that person wearing it constantly as more of a romantic thing. [Also, I'm just kind of hypothesizing with the fact that it was given in Paris, but it certainly would make sense, being that the bracelet appeared around that time, and the fact that Paris is very special to both of them]

 

The tapes that John left for Paul. When John died, Yoko gave Paul tape cassettes that John had wanted to give him. One of them had "Free As A Bird " and "Real Love " on it. The other, strangely, had 'For Paul' scribbled on the top, obviously implying that the songs on them weren't just songs he was GIVING Paul, but songs ABOUT Paul. These songs were "Now and Then" and "Grow Old With Me ". Both obvious love songs, the former being about regret, and wishing somebody was back with him.

 

Also, I would just like to add this as a speculation. Leaving India, both John and Paul seemed particularly grumpy and sad. I personally feel like the infamous feud between them might've started around this time. What confuses me though, is what happened? What made them both so upset with one another. Well, using some speculation, and this is me kind of fishing around for a tiny fish in a big ocean, I think John might've tried to take their relationship to the next level. The reason I believe this is because homosexuality was finally legalized in England around this time, and John probably thought that Paul might be ready to make their love public. However, I think Paul was scared and insecure, and kind of just wanted to be 'normal', and turned him down. They both started drifting apart, and Paul moved on to yet another woman while trying to maintain his relationship with Paul. John picked up Yoko so as to say 'So what, look I've got another girl now too." (Not that I doubt Lennon actually loved Yoko) However, instead of making Paul jealous, or fixing their relationship, they just ended up leaving each other and leading their seperate lives. At least that's my theory. This paragraph isn't as much fact as it is my interpretation though.

 

 

 

 

 

And of course there are many of these quotes and stories that aren't just me interpreting something Paul or John said about love or about each other, but are actually kind of weird and confusing if you don't consider that they might have feelings for one another:

 

(Paul walking into the studio)

John: Hey! Did you dream about me last night?

Paul: I can't remember.

John: Very strong dream. We both dreamt about it. It was amazing! Different dreams, you know, but I though you must've been there. {inaudible speech} I was touching you. Nothing sexy, though.

Paul: Nothing to worry about, though?

John: Nothing to worry about, no?

 

(Interview: Interviewer asks about topless bathings suits)

John: (says some stuff I can't quite hear), but I wouldn't have my wife or any of my friends wearing them.

Paul: Well, you've...you've had us wearing them.

John: I know Paulie, you're just so well-built

 

(John talking to Harry Nilsson)

"I'm just like everybody else, Harry. I fell for Paul's looks." [I know this could be taken out of context, but still 'fell for Paul's looks'?, feels pretty romantic to me]

 

(Yoko Ono)

"I think [John] had a desire to [sleep with other men], but I think he was too inhibited. No, not too inhibited. He said [to me]: 'I don't mind if there's an incredibly attractive guy. It's very difficult. They would have to be not just physically attractive, but mentally very advanced too. And you can't find people like that.'" 

For some reason, Yoko doesn't even care to think about the incredibly physically attractive and mentally advanced man that John was with for more than a decade. Hmmm? I wonder who's a beautiful and intelligent man that John might've fallen for?

Yoko had also heard a rehearsal tape with John calling out 'Paul, Paul' in a weird, pleading, and submissive way.

 

 (All the following evidences are from studio takes)

 

John: Okay

*what sounds like a kiss* [obviously could be somebody smacking their lips or chewing something, but based on their conversation, it seems unlikely]

John: To say about the girls that you...do

{insert some talking about the song they're recording at the moment, which seems to be Think For Yourself }

John: Alright, Paul, come along now...

*kiss*

{More practice singing}

John: I will please to see the Earth mend disintegrated (No idea what he's talking about)

John: (whispers) McCartney

 

(Can't really explain this one, so maybe you should just listen to it. It seems to be them saying idiotic random things in fake accents, and then I can't tell if it's Paul or John that says 'Ha, give us a kiss!', and then John goes 'Okay, hmm, well that might be an idea...')

 

Paul: I'll be overpowering this time.

John: Oh, good! I like it when you're brutal.

Paul: Shhhh. Quiet in the studio, please.

 

(Talking about Two of Us being about them)

Paul: Okay, 'two of us riding nowhere" that's as if...we're like...two, but then "we're on our way home"

John: It's like we're a couple of queens...

Paul: Yeah, well...you know. Well, I mean, that's...

John: We ARE a couple of queens.

 

 

 

Now, the biggest thing going against all this (and pretty much the only reason why a lot of people deny McLennon) is that Paul frequently says he's straight, and that he never had sex with John, and so on. If he's says he's straight, then sure, he's straight. (Even though Paul McCartney is literally one of the gayest men I have ever seen) I would believe him completely...That is if he didn't say other things, such as him having absolutely no 'hints' about John being anything other than straight. This is where he messes up. Surely he would've noticed John's strange (sexual and brief) relationship with Stu. (Which has pretty much been confirmed as real by Stu's own sister and John himself, so no arguing there), or have even thought that the rumors about John and Brian were true (which they were, as Pete Shotton said, and John also confirmed later in life, when he was comfortable with his sexuality), or have seen any hints at all, such as John having close friendships with a lot of gay photographers, playwrights, and mostly other artistic people (which obviously doesn't make somebody automatically gay if they hang out with a lot of gay people, but it seems likely that back then, if you were hanging out with other homosexuals, you were probably also gay) But somehow Paul completely denies these facts, making me doubt him. Although I'm not sure why Paul is lying, I have some reasons. Either he feels bad about leaving John for Linda and then John dying, and keeps telling himself lies to make himself feel better, or he doesn't want to say anything while Yoko's still alive. (As he's said, he has 'juicy stuff' to spill about John, but only after both Cynthia and Yoko were dead, which heavily implies that he's spilling something about love, considering those are both John's previous partners) 

 

It's fine if you don't believe in it. There are probably a lot of evidences that go against it. However, I think it's terrible to deny that something more than a friendship could've possibly blossomed out of two young, curious, feminine men with more similarities and emotional connections than any other pairing I've seen in my lifetime.

 

MCLENNON FOREVER!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You know what, I'm getting worn out from typing so much, I'm just gonna stop here. If you need more info, I'll add it, but I doubt that's necessary. I understand how you might think that I'm a crazy theorist, like the Paul is Dead people (whose facts don't really make sense, by the way), but I honestly believe that something was going on. I value your opinion, as many other also just say that what's out there already is the truth, but I just feel as if, if I don't believe this, then there's a lot that doesn't make sense. I hope I didn't waste your time, and I hope that you're at least maybe considering that there might be something we don't know about.

4 June 2018
9.50pm
Avatar
Beatlebug
Find me where ye echo lays
Moderator

Moderators
Forum Posts: 15314
Member Since:
15 February 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

As your resident aromantic asexual, I'm just popping in here to remind you all that there are a lot more ways to love someone than in the traditional romantic/sexual sense. heartjohn-lennon-salute_gif

Also, one small evidence quibble: I'm pretty sure Linda was the friend of Paul's that he was in love with in 'Dear Friend' -- Paul is addressing John, he wouldn't tell John 'I'm in love with a third person' if he were talking about John. (I used to think he could be talking about John until I actually looked at the lines grammatically.)
@JohnLovesPaul

The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:

The Hole Got Fixed, SgtPeppersBulldog, 50yearslate

It verges from the sublime to the ridiculote

Silly-Girl-2016.png Silly-Girl-2017.png bbbadge2018.jpg

New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here

4 June 2018
10.07pm
Avatar
JohnLovesPaul
A Beginning
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
3 June 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Thank you for replying. I'm kind of newer to this website, and I'm kind of nervous to do anything on it, but I ended up making a super long-ass theory thing. 

As for the "Dear Friend" thing, I think you have a  pretty good point. He could be talking about Linda on the surface of the song, just talking to John about it (since the song has to do something with John considering Paul said it was about him), but I still would like to interpret it the way that I personally think Paul meant it. Thanks for your time! 

 

(Also, would you mind explaining to me about the 'whole other ways to love someone' thing? I'm not trying to be rude, since you can't really hear the tone of voice of someone while they're typing. I'm just kind of curious, and I don't think I've ever met an aromantic and/or asexual person. Obviously everybody 'loves' their friends and family and all that stuff, but I'm just wondering if there's other ways to, well, I don't know, like love love someone in a nonromantic or nonsexual way. Could you please explain it to me? It's okay, you don't have to, I know this is weird, I'm just curious.)

4 June 2018
10.40pm
Avatar
Beatlebug
Find me where ye echo lays
Moderator

Moderators
Forum Posts: 15314
Member Since:
15 February 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Not weird at all, @JohnLovesPaul, I know I'm a (fairly) rare bird, and I'm always happy to spread the word about my little corner of experience. a-hard-days-night-paul-8

There's platonic love, obviously -- friends -- and platonic love can be stronger than people give it credit for. There are friendships that aren't 'just' friends, they're, like, friends -- it means something that's really kind of special, but still purely platonic. There's also familial love (which I suspect the Beatles' relationships often bordered on -- they were like a band of brothers) and then there's also what's called queerplatonic love. It's kind of like something with a deeper level of commitment/intimacy than typical platonic relationships, but it's not what most would consider a romantic relationship.

Anyway, for my part, I've had a platonic 'crush' on someone where I didn't want to date or hold hands or (god forbid a-hard-days-night-paul-3) have sex with them or whatever, but I also just really appreciate their personality, enjoy being around them, and kind of thought of us as, not a couple, but a particularly complimentary pair of people among the greater group of complimentary people that are my friends and family. Kind of a 'special friend', except that that sounds really stupid. a-hard-days-night-george-9

I hope that helps answer your questions. paul-mccartney-thumb_gif

I would say John and Paul definitely had a unique, intense relationship, but I wouldn't automatically assume it was romantic/sexual. It could have been, or it could not (probably not considering). If the evidence often seems to make it sound romantic, then that may just as well be because there wasn't any vocabulary for the kind of relationship that they had. Who knows? Probably not John or Paul, from the looks of it... mccartney-shrug_01_gif

It verges from the sublime to the ridiculote

Silly-Girl-2016.png Silly-Girl-2017.png bbbadge2018.jpg

New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here

6 June 2018
9.22am
Avatar
Starr Shine?
Waiting in the sky
Apple rooftop
Members
Forum Posts: 15584
Member Since:
1 November 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

George and Paul used to share a sleeping bag when they traveled. John more often than not would bunk with George while Paul would bunk with Ringo.

You can point the relationship finger at any of the four Beatles and make a paring out of it.

https://youtu.be/52nwiTs7bk8

Brainwashed by RadiantCowbells.

If you can't log in and can't use the forum go here and someone will help you out.

7 July 2018
12.54pm
McLennon
A Beginning
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
3 June 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sorry, but I just also had to add a few small things:

 

That studio take of In My Life where Paul says "Stop holding my hand"

 

That studio take of Hey Jude where Paul starts to sing, John interrupts him, and Ringo sings a snippet of Hey Jude but with alternate lyrics:

 

Paul: Hey Jude , don't make...

John: Oh, Paul.

Paul: What?

John: Very hard to sing this, you know?

Ringo: *singing* Do I love youuuu?

John: Ringo, stop.

 

 

Also, just the fact that all their wives/girlfriends said that they were very close, and some of them even said that they thought they loved each other more than them.

 

There's also a tape from John 30/31/32? birthday, where he sings 'Yesterday ' at a party, but instead sings "Why HE had to go, I don't know HE wouldn't say"

 

Also, I think I heard something about John being mad at Yoko at a party or something, and yelling "I wish I was back with Paul"

30 September 2018
12.14pm
Avatar
her_magesty
Casbah Coffee Club
Members
Forum Posts: 22
Member Since:
29 November 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hey everyone!  I have to admit when I was younger I went through a bit of a McLennon "phase," and I've also gone back and forth on what I feel about that phenomenon.  My perception about John and Paul's relationship and their relationships with the other Beatles has been a continual evolution.  I feel inclined to say that I don't like to bash people for thinking this might be true (I think it's actually quite common for people to wonder - Even Philip Norman and Howard Stern have wondered!), but I do like when people can have mature discussions that offer nuanced and emotionally intelligent observations about the guys and their relationships.

I personally don't think John and Paul had a romantic relationship in the traditional, "I'm in love with this person, we are together as a unit, and we are having sex" sense.  I went through a phase when I was younger when I SWORE that they had to have, though!  There are several moments in film and photograph when you can see that they're really GAZING at each other.  But the more I looked at the evidence, the more I saw that (IMHO) people are cherrypicking and drawing conclusions that they WANT to see.  That doesn't mean their relationship wasn't intense, deep, or loving, however.  One can be in awe of another human being, or deeply love and admire them, without having sex or being in a romantic relationship.  I think a lot of it is wish fulfillment.  People love the Beatles, and they love when the Beatles love each other.  Part of the group's appeal was their unity, their cohesiveness, the fact they really did love each other and were like the Four Musketeers.  I do think the friendship and bond between them was very real and showed in their chemistry on stage and in the studio.  They were very, very close, but I think the "shipping" of them takes it a step further and solidifies the notion that close, very emotional bonds can only happen between romantic/sexual partners.  That is a patent untruth as our poster who is asexual and aromantic indicates.

I will never claim to 100% know what their sexual identities are, but Paul identifies as straight publicly, and we really have no option but to respect that.  It honestly bothers me to no end that some people in the McLennon fandom think Paul should just "admit" to having a thing with John.  A: If he didn't, there's nothing to admit.  B: For the sake of argument, if he and John actually DID have dalliances or a full blown affair at any point, if Paul "came out" NOW, nearly 40 years after John's murder, nearly 50 years after the Beatles' breakup, he would face an utter s**tstorm of negativity from the press, from fans, etc.  He already gets so much crap for "getting too political" in his espousing of vegetarianism, marching for gun control, writing "Despite Repeated Warnings," and did you see how the whole internet broke over the "beat the meatles" thing (the circle jerk story from the GQ interview)?  And it wouldn't just hurt him, it would hurt his family and the rest of the Beatle people as well. 

Yoko Ono has disclosed in an interview that her and John used to have discussions about the fluidity of sexual orientation, and she has kind of-sort of outed him posthumously as being bi-curious.  As a bisexual individual, I do find that fascinating and it makes sense to me.   I have seen some interviews where he himself made some inferences that he may not be 100% straight.  That does not, in my opinion, give us the right to draw wild conclusions about his relationships with anyone.  He may or may not have slept with a lot of people, male or female, and that information belongs to John and John only.  It is not something I feel the public has a "right to know," and unfortunately a lot of McLennon fans act entitled to "knowing the truth," which I find dehumanizing.  I do find it endearing and interesting to know that John was trying to come to terms with his sexual identity and feeling less icky about it than he felt as a younger man - it shows he was on the way to accepting himself.  BUT, I don't like this "let's put his sexual orientation under a microscope" style discourse I see in the fandom.

Also, it pisses me off to no end as a queer person that people think we can just come on out of the closet without repercussions.  Sure, it's better than it was 50 years ago, but there are still several states in the US that don't have anti-discrimination laws to protect LGBT people (meaning, I could be refused employment and other things I need on the basis of my orientation because the person who has power over that decision doesn't like queer people), and there are still countries in the world where LGBT people can be fined, jailed, or even executed by a court of law for being queer.  So nobody should ever be goaded into an admission of their sexual orientation.  Some people decide it's safer to keep that information private, and that is up to the individual to decide.  One may decide it would be worth the potential risks in order to be out.  Others decide it's not worth it.  So when I see some of these McLennon people actually going on to Paul's social media accounts and saying, "Come on Paul, admit that you and John were a couple!!11!1!1 hee hee hee!" it shows just how little understanding so-called "allies" have for the LGBT community.  We are not a prop or a cute toy for people to get amusement out of, and we face real hate and real problems when we come out.  Demanding that a famous person "come out" because it would fulfill a personal fantasy you have is really dehumanizing as well.  Celebrity is NOT synonymous with community property.  /rant

All of that being said, OP, I really do understand why you feel the way you feel about it.  It is natural for our brains to want to draw conclusions based on "evidence" we see before us.  Truth be told, if someone tomorrow released a sex tape of Lennon and McCartney, I can't say I wouldn't watch it.  I am only human, after-all.  But in the meantime, my personal opinion is that the fact McLennon (or any kind of "shipping" or "slash" pairing between real, living people) shows that society has a long way to go in acknowledging that human relationships that don't involve sex can be just as important and dear to us as human relationships that do involve it.  What I mean is, my feeling is that people tend to perpetuate the notion that two people of the same gender can't have a deep love for one another unless they're also having a sexual/romantic relationship, and that closeness and emotional intimacy is only permissible in sexual/romantic relationships.  If two people are really, really, really close they must also be having regular shags (or be really wanting to).  I don't agree with that notion.

The following people thank her_magesty for this post:

The Hole Got Fixed, Beatlebug
30 September 2018
12.34pm
Avatar
her_magesty
Casbah Coffee Club
Members
Forum Posts: 22
Member Since:
29 November 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

McLennon said
Sorry, but I just also had to add a few small things:

 

That studio take of In My Life where Paul says "Stop holding my hand"

 

That studio take of Hey Jude where Paul starts to sing, John interrupts him, and Ringo sings a snippet of Hey Jude but with alternate lyrics:

 

Paul: Hey Jude , don't make...

John: Oh, Paul.

Paul: What?

John: Very hard to sing this, you know?

Ringo: *singing* Do I love youuuu?

John: Ringo, stop.

 

Also, just the fact that all their wives/girlfriends said that they were very close, and some of them even said that they thought they loved each other more than them.

 

There's also a tape from John 30/31/32? birthday, where he sings 'Yesterday ' at a party, but instead sings "Why HE had to go, I don't know HE wouldn't say"

 

Also, I think I heard something about John being mad at Yoko at a party or something, and yelling "I wish I was back with Paul"  

Now my opinion does tend to differ from the standard narrative in that I think John didn't actually ever want the Beatles or his collaboration with Paul to end forever (the "I want a divorce" thing being John overplaying his hand to try and bully Paul into capitulating with the Allen Klein thing).  I think when Paul was like, "If it's a divorce he wants, it's a divorce he gets" it threw John for a loop and he didn't know what hit him.  He and Yoko's PR campaign aside ("I'm better off without the Beatles, I'm indifferent about it, the dream is over, etc."), I think Paul was the one who really moved on, and John remained sentimental about it.  For a man who publicly went on about how much he wanted it to be over, he sure did stall on letting it BE over!  Privately, he was sentimental about his time with the Beatles even when he was publicly renouncing it.  BUT, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say these quotes are evidence that him and Paul were a "couple" of any kind.  Even the last bit about the party.  I've read that as well.  I do think that John (very unhealthily) kind of put Paul and Yoko at odds with one another by elevating them to the same level of importance in his life.  I think it was more of a "Paul was my primary, adult relationship of importance during this pivotal time of my life and personal development, and Yoko is now my primary, adult relationship, so I'm going to inadvertently talk about that and use it as emotional ammo in fights with Yoko!"  But that is also not strong enough "evidence" that he and Paul were a "couple" at any point.  I think it just indicates how important he considered Paul in his life.

The following people thank her_magesty for this post:

Beatlebug
30 September 2018
2.32pm
Avatar
Tony Japanese
Carnegie Hall
Members
Forum Posts: 580
Member Since:
11 September 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Obviously I have been living under a rock for the past twenty years because I have never read or heard any discussion about a possible relationship between John and Paul. Listen, it's perfectly acceptable for two men to love each other without being in love with each other. I'm fairly certain both John and Paul were comfortable with their hetro-sexuality, but if someone wants to believe that when they were writing I Want To Hold Your Hand , they were really talking to each other than that's fine. 

The following people thank Tony Japanese for this post:

star1262
30 September 2018
5.20pm
Avatar
The Hole Got Fixed
A Dock at Southampton
Moderator

Moderators
Forum Posts: 6988
Member Since:
27 November 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

@her_magesty said

Also, it pisses me off to no end as a queer person that people think we can just come on out of the closet without repercussions.  Sure, it's better than it was 50 years ago, but there are still several states in the US that don't have anti-discrimination laws to protect LGBT people (meaning, I could be refused employment and other things I need on the basis of my orientation because the person who has power over that decision doesn't like queer people), and there are still countries in the world where LGBT people can be fined, jailed, or even executed by a court of law for being queer.  So nobody should ever be goaded into an admission of their sexual orientation.  Some people decide it's safer to keep that information private, and that is up to the individual to decide.  One may decide it would be worth the potential risks in order to be out.  Others decide it's not worth it.  So when I see some of these McLennon people actually going on to Paul's social media accounts and saying, "Come on Paul, admit that you and John were a couple!!11!1!1 hee hee hee!" it shows just how little understanding so-called "allies" have for the LGBT community.  We are not a prop or a cute toy for people to get amusement out of, and we face real hate and real problems when we come out.  Demanding that a famous person "come out" because it would fulfill a personal fantasy you have is really dehumanizing as well.  Celebrity is NOT synonymous with community property.  /rant

Very, very well said. heart

The following people thank The Hole Got Fixed for this post:

Beatlebug, her_magesty

Oh, by the way, this post was made by The Hole Got Fixed!

2016 awards: Username-Badge.png 2017 awards: The-Hole-Got-Fixed-2017.png 2018 awards:The-Hole-Got-Fixed-2018.png

1 October 2018
11.45am
Avatar
Beatlebug
Find me where ye echo lays
Moderator

Moderators
Forum Posts: 15314
Member Since:
15 February 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

@her_magesty THANK YOU. beatlemaniacs_02_gifapple01heartjohn-lennon-salute_gif

The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:

her_magesty

It verges from the sublime to the ridiculote

Silly-Girl-2016.png Silly-Girl-2017.png bbbadge2018.jpg

New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here

1 October 2018
4.36pm
Avatar
TheWalrusWasBrian
Meditating On The Roof
Candlestick Park
Members
Forum Posts: 2118
Member Since:
17 December 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

SO TRUE!!! heart

The following people thank TheWalrusWasBrian for this post:

her_magesty, Beatlebug

IMG_3978.PNG

~~~

The Concert for Bageldesh

~~~

Walrian here! Not Fiddy, or anyone else, actually.

2 October 2018
8.25am
Avatar
her_magesty
Casbah Coffee Club
Members
Forum Posts: 22
Member Since:
29 November 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I also want to add that I think it's a bit ignorant to say that the only people who want to hang out with LGBT people are other LGBT people, as if the only thing we have to offer is someone being able to have sex with us. A: it feeds into the stereotype about LGBT people and hypersexuality, and B: defines people by their sexual orientation alone. Sure, there is an LGBT community - we need each other's support because people misunderstand and marginalize us. We only exist on the fringes because we're forced to by society. Also I have to argue that the perception that there are so many more gays in arts + entertainment than other fields is untrue. It's just that arts + entertainment people are often emotional and expressive because that's what the work calls for, so in a group of other entertainers and artists they may feel less afraid to be themselves. I'd argue that there are just as many gay lawyers, scientists, doctors, teachers, and postal carriers as there are gay show biz + art people.  As it's turning out, LGBT folks make up a larger part of the population than was previously thought.

My thoughts on John's sexual orientation in relation to his 70's social life is that he hung out with Elton and David Bowie and their friends because he liked them. As whole people. And I think by osmosis, seeing men who are not straight being comfortable with themselves showed him it was ok to be fluid in your sexuality. I don't think John would've, for instance, beat the crap out of Bob Wooler (a gay man hi self, mind you) for making queer jokes about him and Brian if he were secure about it as a young man. I do think that was a struggle for John. I think once the term "bisexual" entered the lexicon and he had friends who were comfortable with their sexual identities, he felt he could be more free in exploring his own sexuality and not feel like "less of a man." That being said, it's not evidence that John and Paul were shagging on the regular back in the day. ahdn_john_08_gif Also, it bothers me deeply that people think men should always be hypermasculine and not have a feminine side. Just as people expect women to be super feminine at all times. To put people into boxes like that is so terribly limiting.mccartney-shrug_01_gif

The following people thank her_magesty for this post:

Beatlebug, The Hole Got Fixed
2 October 2018
10.11pm
Avatar
Expert Textpert
In bed.
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 4430
Member Since:
18 April 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Nothing wrong with a little McLennon. I identify as hetero, but sometimes I think it's fun to "Imagine John Lennon " and his gay leanings (or bi leanings). We shouldn't overthink things or try to put them in a box and label them (at least that's the way I see it). Just like what you like, and treat others as you would like to be treated.

And yeah, whether you're gay or not, it's probably wise not to broadcast the details of your sexuality. People are judgmental and narrow minded.

The following people thank Expert Textpert for this post:

Beatlebug, her_magesty

"This Beatles talk bores me to death.” —John Lennon 

3 October 2018
1.52pm
Avatar
QuarryMan
Rishikesh
Members
Forum Posts: 2588
Member Since:
26 January 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I wish this had been real, would be a real 'Fuh You' to homophobes the world over. It might have been, but unless Paul says something we will never really know. 

Tall, dark-haired QuarryMan likes basketball, music, and naturally, boys. He was a valuable participant on the track team. He is one of Freeport's great contributors to the recording world. As for the immediate future, QuarryMan has no plans, but will take life as it comes. 

 

6 October 2018
6.42am
Avatar
Starr Shine?
Waiting in the sky
Apple rooftop
Members
Forum Posts: 15584
Member Since:
1 November 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

You could always go, 'Brian, the Beatles manager was gay. One of there more popular songs, Hey, You Got To Hide Your Love Away is about that.

https://youtu.be/52nwiTs7bk8

Brainwashed by RadiantCowbells.

If you can't log in and can't use the forum go here and someone will help you out.

11 October 2018
6.25pm
McLennon
A Beginning
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
3 June 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

her_magesty said
I also want to add that I think it's a bit ignorant to say that the only people who want to hang out with LGBT people are other LGBT people, as if the only thing we have to offer is someone being able to have sex with us. A: it feeds into the stereotype about LGBT people and hypersexuality, and B: defines people by their sexual orientation alone. Sure, there is an LGBT community - we need each other's support because people misunderstand and marginalize us. We only exist on the fringes because we're forced to by society. Also I have to argue that the perception that there are so many more gays in arts + entertainment than other fields is untrue. It's just that arts + entertainment people are often emotional and expressive because that's what the work calls for, so in a group of other entertainers and artists they may feel less afraid to be themselves. I'd argue that there are just as many gay lawyers, scientists, doctors, teachers, and postal carriers as there are gay show biz + art people.  As it's turning out, LGBT folks make up a larger part of the population than was previously thought.

My thoughts on John's sexual orientation in relation to his 70's social life is that he hung out with Elton and David Bowie and their friends because he liked them. As whole people. And I think by osmosis, seeing men who are not straight being comfortable with themselves showed him it was ok to be fluid in your sexuality. I don't think John would've, for instance, beat the crap out of Bob Wooler (a gay man hi self, mind you) for making queer jokes about him and Brian if he were secure about it as a young man. I do think that was a struggle for John. I think once the term "bisexual" entered the lexicon and he had friends who were comfortable with their sexual identities, he felt he could be more free in exploring his own sexuality and not feel like "less of a man." That being said, it's not evidence that John and Paul were shagging on the regular back in the day. ahdn_john_08_gif Also, it bothers me deeply that people think men should always be hypermasculine and not have a feminine side. Just as people expect women to be super feminine at all times. To put people into boxes like that is so terribly limiting.mccartney-shrug_01_gif  

Sorry if I offended anyone in anyway. I'm not even straight myself, and I certainly didn't see anything wrong with it when I wrote it. I wasn't trying to say you could only hang out with somebody if they shared the same sexuality as you, or meant that if you hang out with non-straight people, it means you can't be straight. I was just pointing out that homosexuality made a lot of people uncomfortable back then, and although there was still accepting people back then, I just meant if all your friends were gay, you were either really accepting (which I'm sure the Beatles were) or you were like them, and felt a connection with them because everybody else either was disgusted by you, and/or felt uncomfortable around you (for dumb reasons........oh boy, have we come far with equal rights!) 

Also, I don't think anything happened between Elton and Lennon. "No, they're just good friends." (Lmk if you get that reference) Most of John's famous bisexual/gay friends were most likely just friends! Other bisexual friends of his might've possibly explored stuff with him, though (despite just being theories) I read something somewhere that Bowie came onto him, but he said something along the lines of "Sorry, but I'm with Yoko", or something. And that weird video of John holding Mick Jagger from the back is a bit odd, too. (You know, the one where he's stroking Mick's hair, and putting his hand under Jagger's shirt and caressing Mick's chest)

What I'm trying to say is that, I was just pointing out that there are certain possibilities and hints based on the large number of LGBT people he hung out with. I wasn't trying to say he 'got down' with every one of them, or had to be gay all of a sudden. I was just using it as more possible evidence.

(Also, I don't try to put anyone into boxes when it comes to being masculine/feminine. I think everybody should just be allowed to act how they want and not be bothered about it. Again, I was just saying that men were scared of being seen as feminine back then, so it's a bit strange that John, and Paul maybe.....or maybe definitely, couldn't care less. Besides the Bob Wooler incidents.)

Again, sorry if I offended anybody. I'm not sure if this is a good apology or not, but I hope you can forgive little ol' bisexual me for being unknowingly rude, thanks!

The following people thank McLennon for this post:

The Hole Got Fixed
3 May 2019
4.14pm
Avatar
AppleScruffJunior
Sitting here doing nothing but procrastinating...
Apple rooftop
Reviewers

Members
Forum Posts: 6385
Member Since:
18 March 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I don't think we have a thread on John and Paul's friendship so I'll post it here but if there is one feel free to move this. 

 

I love this interview with the band where Paul had a terrible stomach virus and he looks like he wants to hurl throughout it. John's continuous glancing to make sure he's ok is so sweet and when he ignores the interviewer's questions and asks Paul "alright?" at 1:16- very cute. You also see that casual Lennon snark in his first line though, "when you gotta go, you gotta go" and then his cheeky grin at Paul. I love it!  

 

The following people thank AppleScruffJunior for this post:

50yearslate, ScarlettFieldsForever, QuarryMan, Beatlebug

 

INTROVERTS UNITE! Separately....in your own homes!

                 ***

Make Love, Not Wardrobes!

                ***

"Stop throwing jelly beans at me"- George Harrison

Forum Timezone: America/Chicago
Most Users Ever Online: 700
Currently Online: vonbontee, Ahhh Girl, Getbackintheussr
1
Guest(s)
Top Posters:
Starr Shine?: 15584
Ron Nasty: 9792
Necko: 7856
50yearslate: 7555
parlance: 7111
mr. Sun king coming together: 6403
AppleScruffJunior: 6385
Mr. Kite: 6147
trcanberra: 6061
mithveaen: 4621
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 87
Members: 2732
Moderators: 6
Admins: 2
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 44
Topics: 4771
Posts: 329098
Newest Members:
NDDPM, HereThereAndEverywhere_1, wadawano, Hiram@123, Jimmie K
Moderators: Joe: 5061, Zig: 9807, meanmistermustard: 22279, Ahhh Girl: 18425, Beatlebug: 15314, The Hole Got Fixed: 6988
Administrators: Joe: 5061, Ellie: 4