Naughty Boy Face.

Good lord this man is gorgeous

You were only waiting for this moment to arrive...

in the Phone. straight up "procrastinating it". and by "it" haha well. lets justr say. My assignments

part 1

They are so perfect

John Lennon and Paul McCartney behind the scenes of Magical Mystery Tour (1967)

Beautiful boys

Some pictures of the Beatles with each others’ children

I rewrote an old fic cause before I was presenting Ringo as straight and I'm tired of doing that.

Pretty proud of this.

Lots of McStarr but most other ships are mentioned too.

it's inspired by this photo

OMG look at Ringo! Why was it necessary to have a random girl in this pic?

Having a swim in 1963

I agree with this except I think it is very likely there was a physical relationship, although who can say. Well I wish someone could say. But I know it's none of my business. But still ...

Discussing McLennon's opponents arguments

Disclaimer: By writing McLennon in the title of this post, I made a simplification. I understand "believing in McLennon" as believing, or even contemplating / leaving a window to the possibility that John and Paul's relationship was not purely platonic. This includes variations: that John was unhappily in love with Paul, that they were secret lovers, and - most likely in my opinion - that their feelings for each other were (at least in part) romantic, but they didn't do anything about it. Often, especially in general (non-Mclennon) Beatles groups, I am faced with disbelief or even outright dislike when someone starts this topic. Today I will try to look at what the opponents of our thesis say.

"You're just sexualizing everything! There may be a close friendship between men" (in a more ridiculous and nasty version that I saw in the comment on YT: "Only women and gays believe in McLennon because straight men know that there can be close friendship between men") Well, we start with a difficult topic. There are two different harmful points of view in society. The first is amatonormativity, according to which the only important relationship in a person's life is a romantic one, and friendships are less important. In this context, our critics might be right. BUT! There is also another harmful mechanism that must not be forgotten - homophobia. According to it, being an LGBTQ person is something wrong and a disgrace. Therefore, we cannot think of our idols (e.g., musical idols) as having (or contemplating) romantic and / or sexual relationships/feelings with people of the same sex. Homophobia permeates society as a whole, including historians who often interpreted two men who were close to each other as "just friends" (for example, Alexander the Great and Hephaestion). We are dealing with the same at McLennon. So we should be prudent and, where possible, fair when trying to judge any relationship considering the existence of both homophobia and amatonormativity.

"Who cares? What does it change if these two guys were in love?" Well, it changes a lot. If we accept that Lennon and McCartney were in love, we adopt a slightly different view of the breakup of the Beatles. That would explain (at least to some degree) why John was so ostentatious about his relationship with Yoko, why they got married just eight days after Paul, why he disliked Linda so much, and, most of all, why he attacked Paul so fiercely in 1970 and 1971. Of course, anger, jealousy, greed and insecurity can cause different behaviors (e.g. Gilmour and Waters fighting), but John and Paul fought each other like lovers. They wrote songs for themselves. In one of them, Paul, wanting to ease the battle, writes: "I'm in love with a friend of mine." Why? And why, for instance, does Lennon mention fucking McCartney in 1970s interviews? Broadening your horizon and accepting that the two guys had a romantic friendship would help with the analysis. Isn't that what being a historian/scholar is all about?

"It's impossible because they were both straight" This is something I wrote about above - plugging your ears and shouting: "Lalalala, my idol can't be gay!". Even if you don't think it is likely that two people had a non-platonic relationship, please be at least open to that eventuality. As for John not being straight - I'm preparing a masterpost on it, which will be released this month. Of course, I'll link it here later. As for Paul, the case is more difficult. I think I'll also make a post about it. I suspect (and would like to emphasize that this is only my interpretation, which may not be true) that Paul has been and is attracted to women all his life, and that the only man Paul has looked at romantically is John. It's like in this meme: "I'm straight but John Lennon is John Lennon" :D

"How can you discuss this? Isn't that interfering with their private lives?" Firstly: In my opinion, we can discuss the private life of celebrities, especially if they themselves decide to share it with us. John, Paul and those around them have largely decided to do so. Anyway, people have always analyzed the private life of the Beatels. Here, for example, we see a girl asking Paul in 1964 about his relationship with Jane Asher. And the most important thing: I've noticed that McLennon's opponents are quite okay with analyzing the private lives of the Beatles until the topic of homosexuality / bisexuality comes up. Only then do they say: "Leave them, it's their business!", not before. Do you know what it's called? Queerphobia. Secondly: Just read this post. That's all for now. What do you think? Feel free to comment.

I'm so sorry that my timing's off

But I can't move on if we're still gonna talk

Is it wrong for me to not want half?

I want all of you, all the strings attached

Oh, I'm good at keeping my distance

I know that you're the feeling I'm missing

You know that I hate to admit it

But everything means nothing if I can't have you

I can't write one song that's not about you

Can't drink without thinking about you

Is it too late to tell you that

Everything means nothing if I can't have you?

-If I Can’t Have You (Shawn Mendes)