archived

Firstly, though, we feel morally and ethically obligated to make a brief PSA to make it clear where AKOM stands on exploration of this topic. We do think it’s VITALLY important in understanding Beatles history and Lennon/McCartney as a partnership and we did a podcast series not to be the single authority on this delicate topic but to hopefully kick-start the conversation. As queer women, we don’t think it should be taboo or even controversial to talk about queer issues within the Beatles story, but we do believe that everyone involved should always be treated with empathy and kindness. As such we try hard not to make groundless assumptions or pass judgment about anyone’s sexuality or sexual choices for any reason. “is your impression that Paul also had a romantic and/or sexual interest in John…?” We’re not sure, and we don’t necessarily have a unified opinion on this at AKOM, but we all agree and respect that a NO is a NO, end of story.  If Paul didn’t want a lovers-relationship with John because:  A) he wasn’t into John  B) he wasn’t into men or C) he could be into men but didn’t want to explore that side of himself ALL OF THOSE ARE VALID REASONS.

We’ve gotten a lot of mail about this (usually the nasty kind- yours is the first we’ve answered b/c you don’t sound like a troll) and we know it’s a very popular discussion topic within the fandom. But we’ve also seen some VERY problematic conversations about this that judge and second-guess Paul’s choices about his own body and/or sexuality. So just to repeat:

Every person on the planet has the potential to be in a same-sex relationship or an opposite-sex relationship. But a person’s sexuality is theirs alone to identify and label as they so choose.

Every person also has the inalienable right to choose NOT to have sex with anyone, at any time for any reason. There are so many reasons to choose not to have sex with a person, even if you are attracted to them. Maybe you’re already in a relationship and trying to be monogamous; maybe the other person is in a monogamous relationship; maybe you think the fantasy would be better than reality; maybe your friend likes that person; maybe you work together; maybe you have different expectations; maybe there could be messy unforeseen consequences; Or MAYBE there is a pre-exisitng relationship dynamic that you fear sex will upset.

We feel confident in saying that if Paul didn’t want a relationship with John, it wasn’t due to lack of love. Paul is pretty obviously tripping over himself trying to convey this to John in 1970 (and for the rest of his life). So it is presumably for the reason Yoko stated: Paul was straight, and/or straight-identifying. A pretty boring reason, yes, but the simplest based on the data. For the record, Paul doesn’t need to be EXCESSIVELY straight (or “so heterosexual” as you phrased it) to decline a same-sex relationship. The vast majority of straight men aren’t willing to have sexual relationships with other men, and that’s all that the word “straight” means. Sexual identity is not a measure of a person’s moral character or their capacity for love, either. 

However, if you are asking whether we think Paul questioned his sexuality, of course we think he did. 

First of all, he’s in love with a bisexual man (although it’s doubtful Paul thought of John as bisexual) who IS willing/eager to have sex to him. How in the world would Paul not question his own sexuality? 

Add to that the fact that he has been called homophobic slurs since adolescence (maybe his whole life?), which could make even a relatively secure person insecure. 

Also, Paul has a mirror, and has inherited all the same homophobia that tragically is STILL ever-present today all over tumblr (“his eyebrows, his lips, LOL he LOOKS gay!”). No doubt this would nag at him- as it apparently does others.

Here’s another complicating factor: If Paul believed in a gay-straight binary, and he didn’t consider John gay… what does that make John in Paul’s eyes? And what does that make Paul? Listen to the way boomers talk about John Lennon as being “totally hetero” but also into gay sex for purely “bohemian” reasons. If Paul considers John straight, why would he consider himself anything different? Also, wouldn’t Paul feel enormous pressure to be as “bohemian” as John, even if it was something he didn’t actually want? If John and Paul had an unspoken, “let’s-not-label-it” Special Friendship for years (which they did), Paul could feel the love feelings but skirt the sexuality issue. But if John got to a “let’s cut the bullshit” point in 1967/68, that would force Paul out of his zone of comfort and safety and be not just confusing but also heartbreaking and traumatizing. (And to see fans react to this dilemma with anything other than empathy and unequivocal support is not just disappointing but frankly disgusting)

The issue of sexuality aside, if John ever propositioned Paul, we don’t think there’s ANY chance Paul would take it lightly. Even if he outwardly reacted in a flippant manner (which is completely plausible) we absolutely believe Paul would take it seriously and think (and overthink) it until he drove himself near-crazy.

In a situation where John wanted an affair and Paul did not, which we’re not even 100% certain is the case, as this information comes from Yoko and it’s not clear if she’s speculating, stating what she knows or giving her impression of John’s impression (although in fairness, there is lots of circumstantial evidence to support it) it all comes down to boundaries. Whatever Paul’s boundaries were, they are not ours to judge and they must be respected. 

A popular theory is that Paul desperately wanted to be with John but was too scared, in denial, homophobic or addicted to fame and money to do the “truthful” thing. We don’t believe this. Paul McCartney was/is a person who - for good or ill - always took whatever he wanted and did whatever he wanted. He’s made plenty of selfish and/or reckless decisions in the pursuit of sex. So if John and Paul came to a relationship impasse, it was not likely because Paul McCartney ignored his own desires and had otherworldly self-restraint. If anything, due to his outsized love for John and his desperation in preserving their partnership, we think Paul may have contemplated pushing past his own comfort levels to make John happy and/or make things work. Ultimately, though, we think Paul wanted relationships with women and his special friendship with John, and he made his choices accordingly.

As far as flirting goes, let’s take a page from Dismantling Rape Culture 101: flirting is not consent to have sex. Humans flirt for a variety of reasons; you can flirt with your friends for laughs; you can flirt with people you would/could NEVER have sex with just for the thrill of it; you can flirt to intentionally make people feel better about themselves!  Bartenders flirt for tips. Strangers flirt for fun. Some people are flirty, just as some people are friendly (while others are not) and Paul is a notorious flirt. As a flirt myself, I can 1000% guarantee you that flirting does NOT equal a desire to have sex with a person. Body language can reveal a lot but it can’t tell you a person’s innermost thoughts and psychological motivations in complex detail. However if you want my opinion, John & Paul’s flirting (in Get Back) looks like a form of mutual validation. My impression is that their constant, intense eye-contact is a way of reassuring each other I like you and I’m paying attention to you. Are they attracted to each other? As people, yes, I think that is beyond question. Everyone knows what chemistry looks like and they have TONS of it; and to me, yes, they look absolutely bonkers crazy for each other. Is it proof that they want to have sex (or that Paul wants to have sex with John)? Of course not. But it’s also possible that he did, because anything is possible.