John McCrae gay??


Nuggler
#1
Contrary to popular belief, all the trolls do not reside in CC:

Bytown Museum claims famed war poet John McCrae was gay (external - login to view)


Watch the Harperites sh it can "In Flanders Fields" from next years Nov 11th ceremonies.
 
#juan
+3
#2
I've done a fair amount of reading about John McCrae and this is the first time anyone has suggested that he was gay.
You don't have to be homophobic to consider this an insult to one of our best poets.
 
weaselwords
#3
If that's so why haven't the Harperites sh*tcanned Baird & Moore yet?
 
#juan
#4
A link to John McCrae bio: John Mccrae Biography (external - login to view)
 
wulfie68
+8
#5  Top Rated Post
Who cares?

The poem is a classic, about and written by a veteran of the First World War. It struck a chord in survivors of that war, others that followed and among those of us to whom wars are historical events that friends or loved ones were caught and/or fought in. McCrae's sexual orientation, regardless of who claims what, has no bearing on what he wrote.

As for it being an insult of some kind, I have a hard time believing that man that wrote those words would really care: he devoted his life to serving his country and his fellow man. I doubt he would have denied non-heterosexual soldiers their voice or treatment if they were wounded and needed his care...
 
Nuggler
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by wulfie68View Post

Who cares?

The poem is a classic, about and written by a veteran of the First World War. It struck a chord in survivors of that war, others that followed and among those of us to whom wars are historical events that friends or loved ones were caught and/or fought in. McCrae's sexual orientation, regardless of who claims what, has no bearing on what he wrote.

As for it being an insult of some kind, I have a hard time believing that man that wrote those words would really care: he devoted his life to serving his country and his fellow man. I doubt he would have denied non-heterosexual soldiers their voice or treatment if they were wounded and needed his care...


Exactly: Who cares?? Nicely done, Wulfie. T'was the museum itself who released this bit of stuff. I thought places like that were supposed to be above conjecture.

As far as Baird et al, they will suck on their own nasty Karma soon enough methinks.
 
petros
#7
There are people out there who still think Liberace was straight.
 
Nuggler
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

There are people out there who still think Liberace was straight.


Er, name one. He could damn straight play a piano.
 
#juan
+1
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

There are people out there who still think Liberace was straight.

I don't think Liberace ever denied that he was gay.

I think it was an insult to McCrae to publish that he was gay with no credible evidence.
 
coldstream
+2
#10
It seems to be fair game now, to shanghai someone's reputation for a political cause, long dead and unable to respond. I assume this Corsaro is a homosexual and considers hijacking this most iconic and illustrious of WW1 Canadian Soldiers will help his mission. All it shows me is the true character of the homosexual pathology.. one where there are no borders, no rules, no respect for others, no understanding of truth.. and a desperate need for validation.. and the company of others.. in such a miserable predicament.
Last edited by coldstream; Jul 23rd, 2011 at 02:20 PM..
 
wulfie68
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstreamView Post

It seems to be fair game now, to shanghai someone's reputation for a political cause, long dead and unable to respond. I assume this Corsaro is a homosexual and considers hijacking this most iconic and illustrious of WW1 Canadian Soldiers will help his mission. All it shows me is the true character of the homosexual pathology.. one where there are no borders, no rules, no respect for others, no understanding of truth.. and a desperate need for validation.. and the company of others.. in such a miserable predicament.


While I won't argue that Cosaro seems to be trying to make a half-assed attempt to tie McCrae to his cause (after reading the link the whole thing seems weak in the face of other evidence, citing love letters to women, and claims of engagement by women), I also don't think its fair to say all homosexuals share the same mindset and "desperate need for validation". I do think there is a willingness to strike out by some homosexuals who have felt repressed by society over the years, but its like any other generalization: not necessarily true and definately 100% applicable.
 
petros
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by #juanView Post

I don't think Liberace ever denied that he was gay.

How many even knew he was gay? How about John Wayne or Rock Hudson?
 
lone wolf
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by NugglerView Post

Contrary to popular belief, all the trolls do not reside in CC:

Bytown Museum claims famed war poet John McCrae was gay (external - login to view)


Watch the Harperites sh it can "In Flanders Fields" from next years Nov 11th ceremonies.

Gee - just in time for the new plastic tens....
 
taxslave
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by wulfie68View Post

Who cares?

The poem is a classic, about and written by a veteran of the First World War. It struck a chord in survivors of that war, others that followed and among those of us to whom wars are historical events that friends or loved ones were caught and/or fought in. McCrae's sexual orientation, regardless of who claims what, has no bearing on what he wrote.

As for it being an insult of some kind, I have a hard time believing that man that wrote those words would really care: he devoted his life to serving his country and his fellow man. I doubt he would have denied non-heterosexual soldiers their voice or treatment if they were wounded and needed his care...

YJ and a few other homophobes perhaps. Certainly not any rational person.
 
Dexter Sinister
+3
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstreamView Post

All it shows me is the true character of the homosexual pathology....

Homosexuality's not a pathology, it's a natural condition, not a disease. It's only people who get their values from the wrong place who think it is, and it's the way those people treat homosexuality and homosexuals that lead to foolish excesses like this unsupported claim about John McCrae.
 
Tonington
+1
#16
Yes, coldstream, please post some stains showing gay cells, and non-gay cells...retard. Stop bastardizing English and use words properly, not to fit your stupid agenda. Thankfully stupidity isn't a pathology either, but sometimes I wonder about the philosophical similarities... /flame
 
damngrumpy
+2
#17
All this crap about people being gay in nuts. I have always maintained that half the great
poets, actors, musicians and in some cases great leaders were gay. Even Alexander the
Great.
It is what is in a mans or woman's heart that counts not their gender or their dream of being,
KD Lang can sing, John MCcRea could write poetry and serve our country on the front line
which is more than we can say for most of us. He also did not shrink from giving the
ultimate sacrifice. All this nonsense about sin, and hell and all that goes with it is just a
bunch of mumbling speech that foments hatred and, and false images so the people
engaging in it such activity can feel better about themselves.
Now I am and old grandpa to some 23 grandchildren and I don't know too much about the
gay lifestyle, but I have friends who are and I can say that they are genuine people who
don't look down on others, and they are tolerant of other peoples beliefs and just want the
same in return. If we could just get beyond this perhaps, we could work together to solve
some of the worlds real problems. I am not upset about the fact that someone revealed
that John was gay, who would have know. What I am upset about is that somehow it makes
a difference because I thought that maybe we could get beyond that, but I guess not.
 
weaselwords
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by #juanView Post

I don't think Liberace ever denied that he was gay.

I think it was an insult to McCrae to publish that he was gay with no credible evidence.

I think the libel suits Liberace won against the Hollywood Confidential magazine (1957) & the Daily Mirror newpaper in 1959 for an article written in 1956 would suggest differently
 
Cliffy
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by weaselwordsView Post

I think the libel suits Liberace won against the Hollywood Confidential magazine (1957) & the Daily Mirror newpaper in 1959 for an article written in 1956 would suggest differently

Was anybody openly gay in the 50s? Seems to me that not only could it get you killed, or jailed in many places but it would end your career. It was the McCarthy era after all and queer and commie were synonymous. Insiders may have known but it was hidden from the public. It wasn't until the 60s that most of them felt safe enough to come out of the closet.

50 years! - we have come a long way baby (at least most of us, Coldstream being an exception).

As has been noted: homophobes are usually closet queens.
 
relic
+1
#20
What't the rule,how long do they have to wait before they can start altering {making up}history to suit an agenda ? I think it's getting easier now,younger people don't care what happened more than twenty minutes ago and some people think that if it's in print {or someone in "authority" says it it must be true.
 
Cliffy
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by relicView Post

What't the rule,how long do they have to wait before they can start altering {making up}history to suit an agenda ? I think it's getting easier now,younger people don't care what happened more than twenty minutes ago and some people think that if it's in print {or someone in "authority" says it it must be true.

Does not every generation rewrite history to suit themselves? HisStory is just that. It is only loosely based on facts and mostly opinion. Just look at how Canadian HisStory has been whitewashed to take out all the nasty bits.
 
bluebyrd35
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by #juanView Post

I've done a fair amount of reading about John McCrae and this is the first time anyone has suggested that he was gay.
You don't have to be homophobic to consider this an insult to one of our best poets.

ewh

For goodness sake, being ".gay is an insult??" Is being black, or having blue eyes also consider an insult??
 
screwtape
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by bluebyrd35View Post

ewh

For goodness sake, being ".gay is an insult??" Is being black, or having blue eyes also consider an insult??

Yes, in certain times and circles, being accused of being gay is not just an insult but a deadly, mortal insult. I'm sure Dr. McCrae would have seen it that way. He was evidently quite forward-thinking and tolerant for his time - when he was in medical school he paid his tuition partly by tutoring other students, including two of the first women to become doctors in Ontario. He did this even though much of the senior medical 'establishment' firmly believed that women had no business becoming doctors. However, being tolerant is one thing; letting other people threaten your career and your life is something else entirely.

When World War 1 began, Dr. McCrae was a member of the Scottish Presbyterian church, a respected doctor with an established private practice, an internationally famous pathologist and university professor, and a veteran artillery officer from the Boer War.

He reluctantly re-joined the army at the start of WW1 because he believed it was his duty. He served first as a brigade-level field surgeon before being appointed to command a major field hospital. When he died, he had just been named Consulting Physician to the entire First British Army, the first non-Brit to achieve such a position. He was also, thanks to 'In Flanders Fields', a world-famous poet.

If, at any time during his life, Dr. McCrae had ever been accused of being a homosexual (and I use the word 'accused' deliberately), the allegation would have tarnished - and could have destroyed - his honour, his reputation, his career, and very probably his life. In that era, being known to be gay would earn you an instant dishonourable discharge from the army, possibly with stockade time thrown in, regardless of your rank. It would get you dismissed from any medical faculty, would cost you your position as an official government pathologist (coroner), and would probably lose you your license to practice medicine. It also wouldn't do wonderful things for your position as a member of a Presbyterian congregation.

I suppose as a known gay, ex-Dr. McCrae might still have had a career as a poet, but that would be about all he would have had left, and his poetry was never more than a stress-relieving hobby for him -- he never considered himself a professional poet like Siegfried Sassoon and some other WW1 war poets.

So yes, I do think Dr. McCrae would have considered being labelled 'gay' an insult, regardless of whether it was a libel or the truth.

Considering the consequences he would have faced if he were 'outed', I also think that if Dr. McCrae really were gay, any evidence of that orientation would be buried so deep in the back of the closet that it would never ever see the light of day. In other words, I would be amazed if the Bytown Museum's curator can produce a single tiny shred of contemporary evidence to support the allegation that Dr. McCrae was homosexual. Again, I use the word 'allegation' rather than 'claim', because that is what a professional man or officer of Dr. McCrae's era would have considered it.

On the subject of Lt. Helmer, Dr. McCrae's alleged 'boyfriend', I find Dr. McCrae's description of Lt. Helmer's funeral quite telling. Dr. McCrae mentioned that Lt. Helmer had carried a photograph of his girlfriend, that they recovered the photograph with a hole pierced through it by a fragment of the shell that had killed Lt. Helmer and that they then buried the photograph in the sandbag with the surviving shreds of the lieutenant's body. To me, that sounds more like a man writing about the death of a friend than a lover, especially considering that the entry is in a private diary.
 
coldstream
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter SinisterView Post

Homosexuality's not a pathology, it's a natural condition, not a disease. It's only people who get their values from the wrong place who think it is, and it's the way those people treat homosexuality and homosexuals that lead to foolish excesses like this unsupported claim about John McCrae.

The only thing for sure is that homosexuality is NOT a natural condition. You can argue back and forth the meaning of the word pathology.. but any phenomenon that leads to a such devastating consequences.. the highest rates of suicide, clinical depression, isolation, drug and alcohol dependence, disease.. and a dramitically reduced life expectancy.. of any identifiable demographic.. is best treated as a pathology, one that can be cured.. PROVIDING the will to do so is there. This cult of affirmation our society has involved itself with is doing nothing beneficial for those afflicted with a condition so steeped in neuroses and misery.
 
petros
+1
#25
How do you become gay? Gay dogs, gay cats, gay moose, gay elephants, gay fish, gay lizards but nope humans just choose to be gay.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...exual_behavior (external - login to view)
 
bluebyrd35
#26
Yes, I do understand that back then it would have been disasterous to imply he was gay. However, whether he was or not at this juncture, he certainly isn't in a position (being dead) to be harmed by such an allegation.

What is irritating is, in this day and age, to find those who still consider one's sexual orientation an insult. It does not change how I feel about his poetry, which I hate to admit, is the only way I knew the man. From your post I now know a great deal more.
 
coldstream
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

How do you become gay? Gay dogs, gay cats, gay moose, gay elephants, gay fish, gay lizards but nope humans just choose to be gay.

List of animals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (external - login to view)

Homosexuality is completely unique to the human condition. This mere fact should tell you that it is composed of a willful MORAL character, which only the human conscience can discern and articulate.. and rebel against.

Animals who through confusion or inexperience try to mate with another of the same gender, often is conditions of severe distress, bear no resemblance to the human phenomenon,.. which is based a choice to abrogate all responsibility to a natural, and a divine, order, in the interests of self gratification.. and self destruction.
 
petros
#28
How do you become cured of gay? Do you have any idea how many gays were killed being forced by courts to take testosterone shots in attempts to cure being gay?

Probably not.
 
lone wolf
+1
#29
Humans who aren't true to themselves to live in a homophobic world aren't happy humans....
 
coldstream
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

How do you become cured of gay? Do you have any idea how many gays were killed being forced by courts to take testosterone shots in attempts to cure being gay?

Probably not.

Start with the realization that it is NOT natural, and in fact is not a mental illness.. it is a moral pathology, willful and deeply self destructive. The answers are not easy, but providing there is a WILL to move away from the fantasy filled neuroses of homosexuality.. there is a way.

The homosexual lobby is now desperately lobbying against this fact... by charging (especially) faith based initiatives are futile and in fact harmful to the individual. But their case is filled with lies and bias.. and monumental and subjective ignorance of the roots of the phenomenon. Faith is an implicit threat because it in fact presupposes both purpose and natural law governing the human condition
 

Similar Threads

0
HBO, John Adams dvd
by El Barto | Jun 12th, 2010
5
Who is John Galt?
by thomaska | Dec 8th, 2006
0
John A. Macdonald
by sanctus | Dec 4th, 2006
40
Anyone here from Saint John, NB
by hairball | Aug 7th, 2006
87
John R. Bolton
by Reverend Blair | Aug 1st, 2005
no new posts