[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Day dop wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Day dop wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Zamidoo wrote:[/b]
Oh, please don't bring up the 'mineshaft' t-shirt. Of course he was a clubber. How he picked up anyone with the haircut he had in that video is another matter, but no-one is disputing that.
Correct me if I am wrong, but what you're you're basically saying is, if you (as you) behaved now as you believe Freddie Mercury did 30-35 years ago, you wouldn't be a good person. I get that.
I don't judge Freddie Mercury by myself and what would constitute being a 'good' person for me because our lives and circumstances are way, way too different. It's impossible. It's a non-starter. Especially with someone like Freddie Mercury, who was so exceptional in so many of his circumstances. I think that's basically what most other people posting here are saying, in various ways. Because it's the only conclusion you can come to when you're faced with the dilemma you outline in your original post.[/QUOTE]
I don't see the circumstances being all that different. Plenty of people dealt with the same circumstances as Freddie did and didn't make such poor choices.
I find the American has become the country of "its not my fault". No one wants to take responsiblity for themselves or their actions.
True, he wrote amazing music, I am just not going to make excuses for his poor behavior like so many will do.
[/QUOTE]
You seem to be confusing making excuses with not being a judgmental holier-than-thou cunt. [/QUOTE]
Now the personal attacks....
Sorry once that starts you've lost the argument. I know that no matter what I say people will make excuses for bad behavior for the sake of celebrity worship. Its Americans theme.
Have fun.
[/QUOTE]
Why am I suspecting you're Russian again, troll? [/QUOTE]
I have no idea. Born and Raised in America. Right in Good Old Philadelphia. Can't get much more American than Philly. Can you?
[/QUOTE]
That was a rhetorical question, obviously.
"This sounds an awful lot like you are just trying to remain blindly loyal to Freddie on a personal level"
What part of 'it doesn't matter' or 'it's not your business' are you incapable of processing?
He is dead, and has been since 1991. Everyone he ever fucked is dead, AIDSy, or has a clean bill of health. He is officially incapable of spreading a single speck of HIV to anyone ever again, unless maybe Mary Austin sneezes too closely to his urn.
The question of whether or not his music rocks is completely separate. You're simply not mentally equipped to look at one without the other; that's fine. It's not me giving tacit approval to his conduct. What I am saying to you is that it does not matter and that your judgement has no currency. I can keep repeating that, you can keep ignoring me - that's fine. It just makes you cunty, is all I'm saying.
[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
"This sounds an awful lot like you are just trying to remain blindly loyal to Freddie on a personal level"
What part of 'it doesn't matter' or 'it's not your business' are you incapable of processing?
He is dead, and has been since 1991. Everyone he ever fucked is dead, AIDSy, or has a clean bill of health. He is officially incapable of spreading a single speck of HIV to anyone ever again, unless maybe Mary Austin sneezes too closely to his urn.
The question of whether or not his music rocks is completely separate. You're simply not mentally equipped to look at one without the other; that's fine. It's not me giving tacit approval to his conduct. What I am saying to you is that it does not matter and that your judgement has no currency. I can keep repeating that, you can keep ignoring me - that's fine. It just makes you cunty, is all I'm saying.[/QUOTE]
Well if I love his music and don't like him as a person, obviously I am able to seperate the two.
I understand your point. But find it a bit ridiculous to be honest. Just because something "no longer matters" doesn't mean it is free from being talked about. I think historians in general would be out of work if we took that idea. If someone comes on here and said "man Fredddie was such a great person" Would you say "well that doesn't matter because he's dead". Of course not.
[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b] I am 32 y/o same age as Freddie was in 1979. I am actually bisexual but am in a relationship with a woman. [/QUOTE]
So what we've got here is, apparently, a bisexual in a same sex relationship with a woman, that has an issue with Freddie wearing a gay bar shirt in the Don't Stop me Now video.
Seems legit.
Now you are the one trolling....lol
[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b]
Now you are the one trolling....lol[/QUOTE]
Not at all. It's just another example of your faulty reasoning, or, your inconsistency whilst bullshtting.
"I think historians in general would be out of work if we took that idea"
I think comparing this thread to what historians do is a bit of a leap.
[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
"I think historians in general would be out of work if we took that idea"
I think comparing this thread to what historians do is a bit of a leap. [/QUOTE]
Well maybe. But Freddie is a big part of music history and history is always analyzed, the good and the bad. Even if it no longer matters.
Don't get me wrong, I am sure there are good points about Freddie, he seemed like he had a really good sense of humor.
"there is pretty good evidence he was sleeping around when he knew he had HIV"
Like most people, from all that we're able to know, I've come to the conclusion that Freddie would've suspected this to have been the case at the latter part of '85, or any time after.
Baring that in mind, aside from Jim who he'd already slept with, who are these people that he slept with after the fall of '85? Where's this "pretty good evidence" you speak of?
Even if you had a list of people, which you haven't, are you suggesting that people who suspect they have HIV don't use condoms?
Where's this photograph you have of Freddie having sex with a complete stranger on the Magic tour?
Oh right, you have nothing. Zilch.
[QUOTE] [b]Day dop wrote:[/b]
"there is pretty good evidence he was sleeping around when he knew he had HIV"
Like most people, from all that we're able to know, I've come to the conclusion that Freddie would've suspected this to have been the case at the latter part of '85, or any time after.
Baring that in mind, aside from Jim who he'd already slept with, who are these people that he slept with after the fall of '85? Where's the "pretty good evidence"?
Even if you had a list of people, which you haven't, are you suggesting that people who suspect they have HIV don't use condoms?
Where's this photograph you have of Freddie having sex with a complete stranger on the Magic tour?
Oh right, you have nothing. Zilch.
[/QUOTE]
But your conclusion that it was late 85 could be wrong. Barbara's info indicates it was earlier. Mary also said it was earlier. I'll have to find the interview where they said Freddie had all kinds of guys in his room during the 85 tour.
So I am expected to take what you say as gospel without any proof but I need photos to get my opinion across???
Again, no one knows, not you or I. But there is certainly a fair possibility that Freddie slept around knowing he was infected. We don't know either way.
"Barbara's info indicates it was earlier"
We've already addressed that. She put foward two possibilities regarding when they first met. One of those was that he was in denial, and the other was that he simply didn't know. That's speculation. But what you've somehow taken from it, is that "he knew". Nowhere did she say that he knew in 1984. Nowhere did it say the cut finger incident was in 1984. And it certainly didn't happen during the works tour in 1985 either.
"I'll have to find the interview where they said Freddie had all kinds of guys in his room during the 85 tour."
What fucking difference would that make?
The Works tour
Start date 24 August 1984
End date 15 May 1985
Do you notice the dates?
So that brings us to Mary Austin. Where did she say that?
Here?
http://www.freddie.ru/e/archives/daily_mail/
Notice what's been written at the top about David Wigg regarding dates - "I think this interview is worth it, although there are a lot of discrepancies, especially concerning the dates. Certainly David Wigg isn't a Queen expert and he must have confused some facts and events, well-known for everyone who is acquainted at least with Queen discography."
The article itself, written by him says "Freddie lived with the knowledge that he was HIV-positive for seven years. He was 45 when he died from Aids-induced bronchial pneumonia."
But nowhere does it say that Mary said it, those words aren't a quote of hers. Those are David's Wigg's words, and If you do wish to take what David Wigg says as gospel, then Freddie watched DVD footage of his past performances... even though you couldn't get DVD's back then. But take what David Wigg says for gospel when it comes to dates by all means.
You'll find that here. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2301718/Freddie-Mercury-Queen-stars-lover-Mary-Austin-cursed-fortune.html
"So I am expected to take what you say as gospel without any proof but I need photos to get my opinion across???"
Did I say anywhere that you can't double check what I say?
You said "pretty good evidence", now you've changed it to "a fair possibility"
I'm waiting on the "pretty good evidence."
[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
"This sounds an awful lot like you are just trying to remain blindly loyal to Freddie on a personal level"
What part of 'it doesn't matter' or 'it's not your business' are you incapable of processing?
He is dead, and has been since 1991. Everyone he ever fucked is dead, AIDSy, or has a clean bill of health. He is officially incapable of spreading a single speck of HIV to anyone ever again, unless maybe Mary Austin sneezes too closely to his urn.
The question of whether or not his music rocks is completely separate. You're simply not mentally equipped to look at one without the other; that's fine. It's not me giving tacit approval to his conduct. What I am saying to you is that it does not matter and that your judgement has no currency. I can keep repeating that, you can keep ignoring me - that's fine. It just makes you cunty, is all I'm saying.[/QUOTE]
LOL @ Mary Austin sneezing. Holy shit, Zebonka, that had me in stitches.
[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Day dop wrote:[/b]
"there is pretty good evidence he was sleeping around when he knew he had HIV"
Like most people, from all that we're able to know, I've come to the conclusion that Freddie would've suspected this to have been the case at the latter part of '85, or any time after.
Baring that in mind, aside from Jim who he'd already slept with, who are these people that he slept with after the fall of '85? Where's the "pretty good evidence"?
Even if you had a list of people, which you haven't, are you suggesting that people who suspect they have HIV don't use condoms?
Where's this photograph you have of Freddie having sex with a complete stranger on the Magic tour?
Oh right, you have nothing. Zilch.
[/QUOTE]
But your conclusion that it was late 85 could be wrong. Barbara's info indicates it was earlier. Mary also said it was earlier. I'll have to find the interview where they said Freddie had all kinds of guys in his room during the 85 tour.
So I am expected to take what you say as gospel without any proof but I need photos to get my opinion across???
Again, no one knows, not you or I. But there is certainly a fair possibility that Freddie slept around knowing he was infected. We don't know either way.
[/QUOTE]
Kahle33, as I said, this HIV business will always be a bit of an uncomfortable issue. But, remember, Freddie himself paid for all of his transgressions with his life, and he died a horrible, horrible death. Do you honestly think he meant to infect others and make them die such a death? I'm sure he didn't. He was irresponsible, but that's it.
I've been a Queen fan for 15 years, and I myself passed through a short period (one or two months) when I had some doubts about Freddie. But I quickly realised that we just can't judge this man. All we know is that he was an unbelievably talented and rare specimen of the human race. You just can't make the argument that he was bad because he may or may not have somewhat irresponsibly had sex during the height of the HIV epidemic in the 80s.
How do you think Jim felt, knowing Freddie probably gave him HIV? He certainly didn't go on to hate him. It was a mixed up time, man. End of.
Yes, Freddie did pay for it with his life and he didn't deserve that nor do I think he intentionally wanted to infect people. But it clear that he thought with the wrong head. Acted on impulse, was very reckless.
[QUOTE] [b]Kahle33 wrote:[/b]
Yes, Freddie did pay for it with his life and he didn't deserve that nor do I think he intentionally wanted to infect people. But it clear that he thought with the wrong head. Acted on impulse, was very reckless. [/QUOTE]
So was most of the gay community post-Stonewall - it was gay liberation time, remember? We can't measure his behaviour with today's ruler. It was a different time.
