MelancholyBlues24
And I realize that I spelled Brian's name wrong. That's autocorrect for you...
Thread
Posts in chronological order
MisterCosmicc
Freddie: I have no friends, only Mary.
Freddie: I stopped having sex.
Don’t take Freddie’s dry sense of humor seriously.
Freddie: I stopped having sex.
Don’t take Freddie’s dry sense of humor seriously.
spiralstatic
Thank you for collating all of this MelancholyBlues24.
For Freddie & others: it is fine to have opinions on events, but you need to acknowledge when that has changed to inventing your own story entirely about who a person is. The reason I had to assume it was a wind up in here was the level of distance from fact at which you were speaking not only of Mary or Jim, but of Freddie too.
And of course we do not know everything about Freddie, let alone others, but that does not mean it is fine to just assume people are exactly how your own imagination suggests to you & fill in the blanks with untruths which you then begin to believe.
In my view, when differing opinions become definitely not ok is when you begin insulting people and assuming & stating characteristics you categorically do not know are facts about who they were.
At that point, your words too no longer say anything true about the person you speak of. Because you can’t say anything true when it comes from a place of such unfounded conjecture. The words you say can then only express something about you.
People in this thread explicitly stating Mary wanted revenge, and directed towards Freddie too. In my view it is not ok & it needs to be acknowledged that however much you believe it, you don’t know it at all & have no proof, so it is not ok to either insult a person this way as though it is fact or use things as foundations for your reasoning which you made up yourself.
For Freddie & others: it is fine to have opinions on events, but you need to acknowledge when that has changed to inventing your own story entirely about who a person is. The reason I had to assume it was a wind up in here was the level of distance from fact at which you were speaking not only of Mary or Jim, but of Freddie too.
And of course we do not know everything about Freddie, let alone others, but that does not mean it is fine to just assume people are exactly how your own imagination suggests to you & fill in the blanks with untruths which you then begin to believe.
In my view, when differing opinions become definitely not ok is when you begin insulting people and assuming & stating characteristics you categorically do not know are facts about who they were.
At that point, your words too no longer say anything true about the person you speak of. Because you can’t say anything true when it comes from a place of such unfounded conjecture. The words you say can then only express something about you.
People in this thread explicitly stating Mary wanted revenge, and directed towards Freddie too. In my view it is not ok & it needs to be acknowledged that however much you believe it, you don’t know it at all & have no proof, so it is not ok to either insult a person this way as though it is fact or use things as foundations for your reasoning which you made up yourself.
Invisible Woman
Invisible Woman
@Melancholy Blues 24
Nice research but... there is no big contradictions here. Yes, Phoebe said he saw the mark on his hand, but he also said that Freddie told him about AIDS several weeks after testing. Jim said that after first test Freddie had other tests and maybe Peter saw mark from other test. About the ring, yes, we can see that before his birthday 1986 he had different rings. But after that, in every picture and on every video, it always wore that ring and it's clearly seen that it's a different ring than the one from Live Aid. I think when Jim talked about taking off a ring he thought of their private life, clubs, restaurants, etc. Do you really think Freddie could have said "I have boyfriend (or lover) and I call him - my husband" in the interviews during period 1985-1991? In that interview, where he says he stopped having sex, I think it refers to his wild life, party, promiscuity, not literally sex. In this interview he also said that he is in a relationship and described the relationship.
You say he sold Freddie"s yellow jacket? Maybe he had to, who knows. How many Freddie's things from the house Mary maybe sold although still earns money thanks to Freddie? How many of his things were placed in some basements to collect dust there?
Jim never said that he was only person who take care of Freddie and gave him the medicines. He said Joe and Peter had most job about it. He didn't say "broken bone", he said "sound like broken bone".
Jim never told that he was the only and most important person in his life. He just said that they loved each other very much and they were close. And probably they were.
He didn't say that he had some influence on Queen, only about "fried chicken"
He had the right to publish a book about his life with Freddie. That was his life too. If his book is so insulting, full of lies (and my opinion - it's not ) why none of the people mentioned in the book didn't go to court?
You can do research interviews of other people, of Mary, Brian, Phoebe, Jim Beach, about anyone. You will see that you will find more or less contradictions there also. Of course, when editing interviews for printed editions, adding and deleting words is happen. Who cares after 20 years who said to Jim who Freddie really was, did John Alexander in gay club or Joe Faneli in Freddie's flat?
This editing may be with intention or unintentional. By the way, Jim in his book said Freddie told him " i'm a singer" when they were talking about their jobs in Freddie's flat in March 1985.
But after all, we saw how Freddie was shown in the movie and how some events were shown, especially - Queen didn't perform live for years before Live Aid and it was because of his solo career. This is no accidentaly, the movie was made with that intention.
And when you mentioned Phoebe, he just said in some documentary that "Love of Freddie's life was Garden Lodge. And Jim"
He also said several times in his blog that in his last years, the only piece of jewelry that Freddie wore was the ring Jim gave him.
Nice research but... there is no big contradictions here. Yes, Phoebe said he saw the mark on his hand, but he also said that Freddie told him about AIDS several weeks after testing. Jim said that after first test Freddie had other tests and maybe Peter saw mark from other test. About the ring, yes, we can see that before his birthday 1986 he had different rings. But after that, in every picture and on every video, it always wore that ring and it's clearly seen that it's a different ring than the one from Live Aid. I think when Jim talked about taking off a ring he thought of their private life, clubs, restaurants, etc. Do you really think Freddie could have said "I have boyfriend (or lover) and I call him - my husband" in the interviews during period 1985-1991? In that interview, where he says he stopped having sex, I think it refers to his wild life, party, promiscuity, not literally sex. In this interview he also said that he is in a relationship and described the relationship.
You say he sold Freddie"s yellow jacket? Maybe he had to, who knows. How many Freddie's things from the house Mary maybe sold although still earns money thanks to Freddie? How many of his things were placed in some basements to collect dust there?
Jim never said that he was only person who take care of Freddie and gave him the medicines. He said Joe and Peter had most job about it. He didn't say "broken bone", he said "sound like broken bone".
Jim never told that he was the only and most important person in his life. He just said that they loved each other very much and they were close. And probably they were.
He didn't say that he had some influence on Queen, only about "fried chicken"
He had the right to publish a book about his life with Freddie. That was his life too. If his book is so insulting, full of lies (and my opinion - it's not ) why none of the people mentioned in the book didn't go to court?
You can do research interviews of other people, of Mary, Brian, Phoebe, Jim Beach, about anyone. You will see that you will find more or less contradictions there also. Of course, when editing interviews for printed editions, adding and deleting words is happen. Who cares after 20 years who said to Jim who Freddie really was, did John Alexander in gay club or Joe Faneli in Freddie's flat?
This editing may be with intention or unintentional. By the way, Jim in his book said Freddie told him " i'm a singer" when they were talking about their jobs in Freddie's flat in March 1985.
But after all, we saw how Freddie was shown in the movie and how some events were shown, especially - Queen didn't perform live for years before Live Aid and it was because of his solo career. This is no accidentaly, the movie was made with that intention.
And when you mentioned Phoebe, he just said in some documentary that "Love of Freddie's life was Garden Lodge. And Jim"
He also said several times in his blog that in his last years, the only piece of jewelry that Freddie wore was the ring Jim gave him.
ForFreddie
Spiralstatic...... I understand what you're saying, I really do, but, by the same token, people do have the right to draw their own conclusions, based on what is said/done and, heard....you, yourself have done just that.....and, they have a right to express those thoughts and feelings.... isn't that what you're doing, right now?
I respect everyone's right to come to any conclusions they think best fits this particular situation, not everyone is going to see it the same way and, that's perfectly fine.
True, no one, other than who was present at any particular time, knows what was said and done or, who knew or didn't know anything that was going on, that's why people are left to fill in the blanks and, draw their own conclusions, based on what information is actually out there.
Everyone here, has done just that...drawn their own conclusions.... that's all we CAN do.
I see nothing wrong with people expressing the conclusions they've drawn, we're talking about people who's lives were very public, it's not like anyone commented on anything that wasn't already out there, it's all easily obtained information....not, top secret material.
I respect everyone's right to come to any conclusions they think best fits this particular situation, not everyone is going to see it the same way and, that's perfectly fine.
True, no one, other than who was present at any particular time, knows what was said and done or, who knew or didn't know anything that was going on, that's why people are left to fill in the blanks and, draw their own conclusions, based on what information is actually out there.
Everyone here, has done just that...drawn their own conclusions.... that's all we CAN do.
I see nothing wrong with people expressing the conclusions they've drawn, we're talking about people who's lives were very public, it's not like anyone commented on anything that wasn't already out there, it's all easily obtained information....not, top secret material.
Sweetandtenderhooligan
LOL you realize Freddie frequently lied or exaggerated in interviews, right? He didn't stop having sex and Jim wasn't a liar. Stop fangirling over Mary
ForFreddie
Sweetandtenderhooligan....if that last comment is aimed at me, I have no idea what you're talking about.... my post isn't even about Mary, didn't even mention her.
MelancholyBlues24
@Sweetandtenderhooligan - I never called Jim a liar. I simply stated, and gave examples of, why he lost credibility with me. When someone changes their story four times over, it makes me scratch my head and say, "Wait a minute." That is all.
As far as "fangirling" for Mary. Where do I say that I am pro Mary? Just because I say that I don't believe Jim, doesn't automatically mean that I am all over Mary. Again, I simply asked for proof of clams that the band "hated Mary" or that she was the one that hired the guards, so that I could research and see for myself. I don't blindly believe what I see on public websites.
As far as "fangirling" for Mary. Where do I say that I am pro Mary? Just because I say that I don't believe Jim, doesn't automatically mean that I am all over Mary. Again, I simply asked for proof of clams that the band "hated Mary" or that she was the one that hired the guards, so that I could research and see for myself. I don't blindly believe what I see on public websites.
Sweetandtenderhooligan
MelancholyBlues24
@Invisible Woman
There is a big contradiction, as far as I am concerned, with how the meeting between Jim and Freddie went. The whole "I didn't know who he was" is important because a lot of other things are based on that, including his authenticity. I am not arguing, just disagreeing.
Phoebe states that after Freddie had his hand biopsied, it was after that that he received his HIV diagnosis, so the two go hand-in-hand according to Pheobe's blog. Just stating what I read from what other people deem as a reliable source.
I did not disagree or argue that Freddie wasn't, or didn't, wear the ring Jim gave him. It is clear in all videos and interviews that he did. I was simply stating that he has done it before in the past. Who knows if other people game him the rings that he wore, or if they were his own. Again, Jim made a big deal that Freddie wore HIS ring. In the past, he may just as well been wearing other people's rings too.
I can't comment on other things that belonged to Freddie, nor did I claim to. I was showing Pheobe's blog about the Wembley jacket because I have seen numerous times over that Jim donated it for AIDS research, which according to Phoebe, is not true.
I did not state that Jim said he was the only important person in Freddie's life. Where did I say that?
I will disagree about the right to publish his book. Yes, it was his life too, but where does it show that he had Freddie's permission to publish his intimate details and personal photos? How would you or anyone else feel if someone did the same to you without your permission? It happens all of the time on social media, and there are plenty of lawsuits regarding people displaying unauthorized photos. Of course there has been no legal action against the book because Freddie is not here to dispute anything.
I have not seen the movie, nor am I interested in seeing the movie, so I cannot comment on it.
I fully respect your position and your thoughts, and I don't wish to argue. We all form our own perceptions and views. These are mine based on research that I have done. Nothing more, nothing less.
There is a big contradiction, as far as I am concerned, with how the meeting between Jim and Freddie went. The whole "I didn't know who he was" is important because a lot of other things are based on that, including his authenticity. I am not arguing, just disagreeing.
Phoebe states that after Freddie had his hand biopsied, it was after that that he received his HIV diagnosis, so the two go hand-in-hand according to Pheobe's blog. Just stating what I read from what other people deem as a reliable source.
I did not disagree or argue that Freddie wasn't, or didn't, wear the ring Jim gave him. It is clear in all videos and interviews that he did. I was simply stating that he has done it before in the past. Who knows if other people game him the rings that he wore, or if they were his own. Again, Jim made a big deal that Freddie wore HIS ring. In the past, he may just as well been wearing other people's rings too.
I can't comment on other things that belonged to Freddie, nor did I claim to. I was showing Pheobe's blog about the Wembley jacket because I have seen numerous times over that Jim donated it for AIDS research, which according to Phoebe, is not true.
I did not state that Jim said he was the only important person in Freddie's life. Where did I say that?
I will disagree about the right to publish his book. Yes, it was his life too, but where does it show that he had Freddie's permission to publish his intimate details and personal photos? How would you or anyone else feel if someone did the same to you without your permission? It happens all of the time on social media, and there are plenty of lawsuits regarding people displaying unauthorized photos. Of course there has been no legal action against the book because Freddie is not here to dispute anything.
I have not seen the movie, nor am I interested in seeing the movie, so I cannot comment on it.
I fully respect your position and your thoughts, and I don't wish to argue. We all form our own perceptions and views. These are mine based on research that I have done. Nothing more, nothing less.
Sweetandtenderhooligan
It was his shoulder, not hand. You're damaging your credibility.
MelancholyBlues24
I don’t understand your answer. How I am damaging my credibility?
Phoebe said it was his hand. Jim said it was his shoulder. I choose to believe Phoebe. Others choose to believe Jim.
Phoebe said it was his hand. Jim said it was his shoulder. I choose to believe Phoebe. Others choose to believe Jim.
Invisible Woman
^ I also don't have the intention to argue. I just wrote my view which also based on what I could read and see in the documentaries. Your view is different and I respect that. None of us here from the forum know what is real true about it. But this is a forum, a place to say what we think about something. :)
Donna13
ForFreddie wrote:
“Mary was written as a warm, caring loving friend to Freddie, because she probably would have sued them if they had written the truth... besides, it really wasn't about Mary and Freddie's relationship, the movie was about Freddie and the band...the movie really didn't dwell on the Freddie/Mary relationship....that isn't the way they wanted it to go... that's for another time, perhaps.
The people who wrote the books afterwards, told the truth about Mary.“
——————
What ForFreddie wrote is not just an opinion; it is completely false information. And it is ridiculous.
The movie was about Freddie. His relationship with Mary is prominent in the story. Mary is a private person and in order to prepare for playing Mary, Lucy Boynton used Brian May as a resource.
Mary was a kind person and a loving, caring, lifelong friend to Freddie.
It is not “OK” nor acceptable for anyone to go online and trash her character just because they “feel it in their gut”. That feeling in your gut is hatred. Deal with it in your own personal way, but not by contaminating the internet and Queen fan sites with your hateful feelings and theories. The excuse of “nobody here was there, so I can draw my own conclusions” is a very poor excuse for posting lies and hate on a website for all to see, and for new fans to read and become misled. It is wrong!
I’m surprised people here are willing to say, “Well, that’s my opinion, and I can post whatever I want” when the “opinion” is based on hatred and an attempt to trash a person’s character.
“Mary was written as a warm, caring loving friend to Freddie, because she probably would have sued them if they had written the truth... besides, it really wasn't about Mary and Freddie's relationship, the movie was about Freddie and the band...the movie really didn't dwell on the Freddie/Mary relationship....that isn't the way they wanted it to go... that's for another time, perhaps.
The people who wrote the books afterwards, told the truth about Mary.“
——————
What ForFreddie wrote is not just an opinion; it is completely false information. And it is ridiculous.
The movie was about Freddie. His relationship with Mary is prominent in the story. Mary is a private person and in order to prepare for playing Mary, Lucy Boynton used Brian May as a resource.
Mary was a kind person and a loving, caring, lifelong friend to Freddie.
It is not “OK” nor acceptable for anyone to go online and trash her character just because they “feel it in their gut”. That feeling in your gut is hatred. Deal with it in your own personal way, but not by contaminating the internet and Queen fan sites with your hateful feelings and theories. The excuse of “nobody here was there, so I can draw my own conclusions” is a very poor excuse for posting lies and hate on a website for all to see, and for new fans to read and become misled. It is wrong!
I’m surprised people here are willing to say, “Well, that’s my opinion, and I can post whatever I want” when the “opinion” is based on hatred and an attempt to trash a person’s character.