CHEVYMAN
Thread
Posts in chronological order
CHEVYMAN
Delilah546
I hate the fact that a couple of fans tell lies & that they alter the stories about Freddie and the others on purpose but I don't hate the people who were close to him. I mean, who are we to judge them? Were we there? Did we know them personally? Did we know the truth? No! Barbara was very close to him and he loved her and It's clear. Freddie was a very private man and Barbara respected him a lot in fact she didn't write a book about him and so on. Reinhold Mack told different times that Freddie wanted to stop the gay thing to create a family. And Mary told that a part of him wanted a family...Freddie loved the souls and not the bodies...he didn't like the labels!
JoeRinna
Delilah,
I don't think much of what you said is true,
I don't think much of what you said is true,
JoeRinna
CHEVYMAN
Delilah, I think Mack misunderstood Freddie I think he really enjoyed spending time there and with the kids he had such a spirited personality it seemed. But he had struggled so in his young adult life coming to terms with his sexuality I think it was a great weight off his shoulders. He loved men everything about them. The way they looked , smelled, he liked them a little chubby too.He was just gay and people have to accept him for that as much as they accepted the musician. They were the same guy in the 70s that was in such pain in misery that came out all over his music. He didn’t want to hurt Mary or Barbara or any female but he just wasn’t wired to be anybody but who he was and that’s ok and the rest of the world needs to stop wondering because in my opinion once he came out to himself the sky looked a different color.
Delilah546
We can only talk about personal opinions...we'll never know the truth and it's not our business.
FreddieDearie
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b]
We can only talk about personal opinions...we'll never know the truth and it's not our business. [/QUOTE]
First, I find it ironic that you assert as facts, things that are demonstrably untrue. Just saying.
You made an intellectually dishonest assertion. People can take analytical approach to things. When you dismiss facts or logic as mere opinion, preference, personal taste or "we can't know", "we weren't there"... that is just is patently false and is simply not the case .
Analogical Evidence, Character Evidence, Circumstantial Evidence, Digital evidence , Exculpatory Evidence, Forensic Evidence, Hearsay Evidence, photographic, Physical Evidence, Prima Facie Evidence, Statistical Evidence, testimonial evidence etc...
We have fair judicial systems in this world that make life and death decisions and discern truths and declare verdicts even though juries “weren’t there” when an event happened.
Scientists, investigators, law officials and historians determine the truth of things even though they “weren’t there”.
They consider the evidence and then form their conclusions based on evidence.
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b]
No! Barbara was very close to him and he loved her and It's clear. [/QUOTE]
No, that's not clear at all. All that is clear is that he got a kick out of her and that she was very useful to him as a translator and tour guide. I’m not saying he didn’t love her, just that it’s not clear and the evidence isn’t there,
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] Reinhold Mack told different times that Freddie wanted to stop the gay thing to create a family. [/QUOTE]
Mack clearly thinks that being Freddie being gay was a ”bad thing” for him and he saw Freddie’s comments through that lens.
Mack did say though that Barbara was a horrible friend for Freddie. She was not healthy for Freddie.
And we don't know how much LAJ paid Barbara for her interviews. LAJ’s book was essentially Barbara’s book.
Why do all the work of writing a book when you can just get paid via interviews. She certainly betrayed Freddie’s privacy and would sell false stories to the German tabloids, so let’s not pretend that she wasn’t opportunistic and avaricious.
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] And Mary told that a part of him wanted a family...[/QUOTE]
Mary never told anything about Freddie wanting a family, she never said she wanted Freddie’s baby and he made zero comments about having a baby with her.
That article by David Wigg had a misleading headline, but WITHIN the article neither Mary nor Freddie said ANYTHING about having or not having a baby with each other. Not a thing.
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] Freddie loved the souls and not the bodies...[/QUOTE]
Freddie had sex with LOTS of bodies, not knowing anything about their souls.
He also loved some people’s souls,
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] he didn't like the labels! [/QUOTE]
Not wanting to discuss or explain your sexuality is not the same thing as not believing in “labels”.
Not wanting to be DEFINED by labels is not the same thing as denying the labels apply to you.
He was gay, it is who he was, what he was . He knew he was gay. He even said “Yes I’m gay, so what”? So there he is “labeling” himself.
He believed in labels, he just didn’t believe people should be defined by ONLY that label.
And I don’t see anyone here focused ONLY on his sexuality.
We can only talk about personal opinions...we'll never know the truth and it's not our business. [/QUOTE]
First, I find it ironic that you assert as facts, things that are demonstrably untrue. Just saying.
You made an intellectually dishonest assertion. People can take analytical approach to things. When you dismiss facts or logic as mere opinion, preference, personal taste or "we can't know", "we weren't there"... that is just is patently false and is simply not the case .
Analogical Evidence, Character Evidence, Circumstantial Evidence, Digital evidence , Exculpatory Evidence, Forensic Evidence, Hearsay Evidence, photographic, Physical Evidence, Prima Facie Evidence, Statistical Evidence, testimonial evidence etc...
We have fair judicial systems in this world that make life and death decisions and discern truths and declare verdicts even though juries “weren’t there” when an event happened.
Scientists, investigators, law officials and historians determine the truth of things even though they “weren’t there”.
They consider the evidence and then form their conclusions based on evidence.
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b]
No! Barbara was very close to him and he loved her and It's clear. [/QUOTE]
No, that's not clear at all. All that is clear is that he got a kick out of her and that she was very useful to him as a translator and tour guide. I’m not saying he didn’t love her, just that it’s not clear and the evidence isn’t there,
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] Reinhold Mack told different times that Freddie wanted to stop the gay thing to create a family. [/QUOTE]
Mack clearly thinks that being Freddie being gay was a ”bad thing” for him and he saw Freddie’s comments through that lens.
Mack did say though that Barbara was a horrible friend for Freddie. She was not healthy for Freddie.
And we don't know how much LAJ paid Barbara for her interviews. LAJ’s book was essentially Barbara’s book.
Why do all the work of writing a book when you can just get paid via interviews. She certainly betrayed Freddie’s privacy and would sell false stories to the German tabloids, so let’s not pretend that she wasn’t opportunistic and avaricious.
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] And Mary told that a part of him wanted a family...[/QUOTE]
Mary never told anything about Freddie wanting a family, she never said she wanted Freddie’s baby and he made zero comments about having a baby with her.
That article by David Wigg had a misleading headline, but WITHIN the article neither Mary nor Freddie said ANYTHING about having or not having a baby with each other. Not a thing.
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] Freddie loved the souls and not the bodies...[/QUOTE]
Freddie had sex with LOTS of bodies, not knowing anything about their souls.
He also loved some people’s souls,
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b] he didn't like the labels! [/QUOTE]
Not wanting to discuss or explain your sexuality is not the same thing as not believing in “labels”.
Not wanting to be DEFINED by labels is not the same thing as denying the labels apply to you.
He was gay, it is who he was, what he was . He knew he was gay. He even said “Yes I’m gay, so what”? So there he is “labeling” himself.
He believed in labels, he just didn’t believe people should be defined by ONLY that label.
And I don’t see anyone here focused ONLY on his sexuality.
FreddieDearie
[QUOTE] [b]CHEVYMAN wrote:[/b]
Delilah, I think Mack misunderstood Freddie I think he really enjoyed spending time there and with the kids he had such a spirited personality it seemed. But he had struggled so in his young adult life coming to terms with his sexuality I think it was a great weight off his shoulders. He loved men everything about them. The way they looked , smelled, he liked them a little chubby too.He was just gay and people have to accept him for that as much as they accepted the musician. They were the same guy in the 70s that was in such pain in misery that came out all over his music. He didn’t want to hurt Mary or Barbara or any female but he just wasn’t wired to be anybody but who he was and that’s ok and the rest of the world needs to stop wondering because in my opinion once he came out to himself the sky looked a different color.[/QUOTE]
Wow, on THIS we certainly agree, good post. Mack seems to assume Gay people wish they could be straight. No, they wish to be who they are without having to forfeit the freedoms and choices straight people have,
Wanting to have the same opportunities as straight people is not the same thing as regretting, or not wanting to be, gay.
If Freddie wanted a family, he would’ve wanted to do it as a gay man, not straight.
Delilah, I think Mack misunderstood Freddie I think he really enjoyed spending time there and with the kids he had such a spirited personality it seemed. But he had struggled so in his young adult life coming to terms with his sexuality I think it was a great weight off his shoulders. He loved men everything about them. The way they looked , smelled, he liked them a little chubby too.He was just gay and people have to accept him for that as much as they accepted the musician. They were the same guy in the 70s that was in such pain in misery that came out all over his music. He didn’t want to hurt Mary or Barbara or any female but he just wasn’t wired to be anybody but who he was and that’s ok and the rest of the world needs to stop wondering because in my opinion once he came out to himself the sky looked a different color.[/QUOTE]
Wow, on THIS we certainly agree, good post. Mack seems to assume Gay people wish they could be straight. No, they wish to be who they are without having to forfeit the freedoms and choices straight people have,
Wanting to have the same opportunities as straight people is not the same thing as regretting, or not wanting to be, gay.
If Freddie wanted a family, he would’ve wanted to do it as a gay man, not straight.
Delilah546
I know that we have a fair judicial systems in this world so?. Are you a lawyer or something like that? Unfortunately there are a lot of mistakes in that world as well. I have my personal ideas about Freddie and the others and I'm a fan...I don't care If he lived with a man or a woman or both. It is really useless to discuss this subject. I'm not obsessed with his sexuality...I'm here because I love his voice and his music. And I repeat, Freddie was a very private man and he didn't talk easily with an interviewer and so on.
FreddieDearie
[QUOTE] [b]Delilah546 wrote:[/b]
I know that we have a fair judicial systems in this world so?. Are you a lawyer or something like that? Unfortunately there are a lot of mistakes in that world as well. I have my personal ideas about Freddie and the others and I'm a fan...I don't care If he lived with a man or a woman or both. It is really useless to discuss this subject. I'm not obsessed with his sexuality...I'm here because I love his voice and his music. And I repeat, Freddie was a very private man and he didn't talk easily with an interviewer and so on.[/QUOTE]
OK. Point is that facts can deduced and truths discovered whether we ”were there” or ”know them personally” or not. It's not always just mere opinion. It all depends on how informed one is with available evidence.
I love his music AND I’m fascinated by him as a personn and an artist and don't find it useless at all. In fact it enriches my enjoyment of his music the more I understand about him as a person.
Bohemian Rhapsody becomes much more... rich when one understands the struggle that inspired it.
That's why biographies of artists are so popular, understanding the people behind the art makes enjoying the art that much more fulfilling.
If you’re not interested in that then maybe you shouldn't discuss him as a person.
I know that we have a fair judicial systems in this world so?. Are you a lawyer or something like that? Unfortunately there are a lot of mistakes in that world as well. I have my personal ideas about Freddie and the others and I'm a fan...I don't care If he lived with a man or a woman or both. It is really useless to discuss this subject. I'm not obsessed with his sexuality...I'm here because I love his voice and his music. And I repeat, Freddie was a very private man and he didn't talk easily with an interviewer and so on.[/QUOTE]
OK. Point is that facts can deduced and truths discovered whether we ”were there” or ”know them personally” or not. It's not always just mere opinion. It all depends on how informed one is with available evidence.
I love his music AND I’m fascinated by him as a personn and an artist and don't find it useless at all. In fact it enriches my enjoyment of his music the more I understand about him as a person.
Bohemian Rhapsody becomes much more... rich when one understands the struggle that inspired it.
That's why biographies of artists are so popular, understanding the people behind the art makes enjoying the art that much more fulfilling.
If you’re not interested in that then maybe you shouldn't discuss him as a person.