From todays Metro: The Beatles first album has been named as one of the gayest of all time. Please Please Me from 1963 came 30th in a list of the Top 50 gay albums, complied by Attitude magazine......said "That summer it was the gay album. George and Paul singing into the mic, their cheeks touching, was the gayest thing we'd ever seen." Attitude claimed the album was a "turning point - the beginning of the modern gay era."
Remember our little discussion on the homoerotiscm of that photo a while back?
That's so ridiculous, it's hilarious. They must be the biggest fags ever because there has to be a million pictures of them where they are close together, arms around each other, etc. The crap people come up with sometimes is unbelievable.
Coming from The UK's No.1 Gay Lifestyle Magazine you're probably right. They didn't mention the photo (its from a debate way before your time ) I did, so go gentle on them. It's all their mothers fault apparently.
Hello my baby, hello my honey hello my ragtime gal That Means a Lot
Posts
6,103
Gender
Female
Posts Per Day
3.77
Did you know there's a porn movie called Please Please Me? It's true! Except it's not gay porn. It stars a girl named "Scarlet Johansing", lol. I didn't watch it (ugh) but it was on our satellite guide.
You're so vain, you probably think this post is about you.
You gotta admit four guys singing girl songs and going "oooh" could be seen as sexually ambiguous for the early sixties. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Even Elvis swung his pelvis in a way that female strippers did the bump-and-grind. I think on some level there was a fear of Elvis and the Beatles as loosening our Anglo-Saxon sense of manliness (which we got back with metal bands like Judas Priest, uh, oh, forget that reference.)
Let's face it, Brian Epstein was gay and attracted to the Beatles and essentially dressed them up like dolls in suits as some kind of marketing/homoerotic fantasy.
The "gayness" of the suits (compared to their leather gear--which is totally gay if you watch some of Kenneth Anger's movies from the period) probably was part of the reason John hated them.
I don't think the Beatles were personally gay (with the exception of John's sexual confusion), but their Beatlemania image projected a certain effeminacy/objectification/doll-like-ness. Just look at the cover of "Meet the Beatles". Four little disembodied heads on display like cadbury chocolates.
I think by 1965-66, the Beatles had successfully shed the early effeminate image and were writing original songs like "Run for your Life" to show that they were real, women-beating men.
Complex issue, if you want to be honest about it.
I hope Velvet Underground and Nico made the list, because that is the most gay album cover of all time. Sticky Fingers coming in a close second. Both by Andy Warhol. I wonder how he would have done a Beatles cover?
Let's face it, Brian Epstein was gay and attracted to the Beatles and essentially dressed them up like dolls in suits as some kind of marketing/homoerotic fantasy.
The "gayness" of the suits (compared to their leather gear--which is totally gay if you watch some of Kenneth Anger's movies from the period) probably was part of the reason John hated them.
The gayness of the suits? Holy mess. Kevin, you have really opened a box here.
Did you know there's a porn movie called Please Please Me? It's true! Except it's not gay porn. It stars a girl named "Scarlet Johansing", lol. I didn't watch it (ugh) but it was on our satellite guide.
You didnt watch it?? How do you know the film so fully then?? Hm... Sorry girl...
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Kevin
Male
Female
Logged
) I did, so go gentle on them. It's all their mothers fault apparently.
Hm...
(angry
