I Agree-they Both Needed Each Other. What’s Most Frustrating In This Fandom Is That Some People Think

Paul being a narcissist again. I’m just as funny as John but only when I’m in a bad mood. So remember I’m just as funny as John but also John is a bad man/asshole. I’m over this man

“With me, how I wrote depended on my mood. The only way I would be sort of biting and witty like that was if I was in a bad mood! I was very good at sarcasm myself. I could really keep up with John then. If I was in a bad enough mood, I was right up there with him. We were terrific then. He could be as wicked as he wanted, and I could be as wicked, too.”

—

Paul McCartney to Playboy, 1984

100 percent agree. People aren’t even allowed to change. That’s the sad part

i know you're done with this topic, but i just want to get some things out of my system: you're right in saying that kids don't care about women/victims and i bet they have no idea about what cynthia, may or yoko etc have had to say about that subject and they wouldn't care to find out anyway. plus: what happened to the concept of restorative justice? i guess the kids aren't aware of it, but the whole "cancelling" philosophy is pretty silly anyway. i don't think kids on twitter/tik tok have the right to destroy someone's life and/or legacy forever because of colossal mistakes they made in the past, no matter how big and serious they were... kids seem to believe they do have that right nowadays, but that only serves to stroke their ego, to make them believe in their moral superiority. but is that behavior actually changing the fucking world? is that feminist activism? is that helping change men's systemic treatment of us? no, it isn't, but if kids want to continue to be self-indulgent and childish, so be it.

I am done with this topic but this was a nice ask so I’m posting it :)

I’m also so immune to internet activism thinking that calling a dead guy a wifebeater makes them woke or that disliking his annoying ass wife is misogynistic or whatever. When you’re actually doing things to try and help disenfranchised women, like I was doing before the pandemic, you’re just open to a whole new reality. It’s insane how whole movements have been reduced to jokes bc of this type of """activism""". Like, my 15yo tiktok addicted sister genuinely can’t hear the word feminism without laughing and tbh, I’m pretty close to that as well. How activism, instead of actively and practically trying to improve people’s lives, became a fucking punchline. Like yeah, this guy was violent to women decades ago. He was shot dead in front of his house. There, misogyny solved, except for the fifteen thousand jokes about his abuse (making fun of the victims!) and the fact he died from gun violence.

Could anybody tells me where this comes from?It is very important for my mclennon theory I think……

It can incredibly fit well for the I saw her standing there script

I mean this……you act like a QUEEN……😮

Yes thank you! Why if he claims to love this man do nigh is every single article about how he really did everything in the Beatles and John was just there?

Paul McCartney, I love you but I hate you so much right now.

Stop trashing John (who can’t defend himself because he’s been dead for 41 years) just to make yourself seem more important. You did your best and most important work TOGETHER. 

And why John specifically? Were George and Ringo master electricians? I know John was paranoid too often but sometimes with Paul I think it’s justified.

The most shocking one for Paul would be Here Today. Imagine the pain of 1964 Paul finding out his creative partner was going to die

Beatle (Paul) Hypotheticals #16

If you could show Paul four of his solo songs in 1964, which one of the following songs do you think would most surprise him and why?

Kreen Akore

Monkberry Moon Delight

Dear Friend

Temporary Secretary

Are there any songs not listed above that you think would be more shocking to Paul? If so, which ones?

Thanks lovely. I suppose these comments are striking a nerve as anonymous asks are already complaining about these comments. Shrugs. It’s a shame that people can’t critically examine these topics but given how much more popular Paul is on tumblr than John, it’s not surprising. I’ll still look forward to seeing Get Back at the end of the month and having John back in the flesh for even a little bit of time.

“Some of those who eulogised Lennon seemingly could not do so without denigrating McCartney, Harrison and Starr or devaluing their contributions to the Beatles. “He [Lennon] stood for a mixture of tough minded realism… wit and intellect. Paul on the other hand was a pretty boy.” The most famous example of this came from the Village Voice’s Christgau, one of America’s most powerful rock critics. In a piece shortly following Lennon’s death, Christgau referred to the three remaining Beatles as “hacks” and blamed their refusal to accept Ono into the band for the breakup. He also repeated a number of misconceptions about Lennon that, while widely accepted, were untrue. This included praising Lennon, the only middle-class born Beatle, as a “working-class” hero and declaring that Lennon had always been the only artistic, avant-garde Beatle because “the others just didn’t have the stuff.” His obituary of Lennon stated that the wrong Beatle had been killed. “Why is it always Bobby Kennedy or John Lennon? Why isn’t it Richard Nixon or Paul McCartney?”

Erin Torkelson Weber, The Beatles and the Historians

I love (eye roll) this generation of writers who think they are being edgy by going in the other direction by trashing John because he didn’t want to be best buddies with every single person. It reminds me of Fred Seaman’s book where the captain who took John to the Bahamas insisted on moving himself and his family into johns rented apartment, forced John to sleep in the floor and pay for all their outings and meals for a month while the captain pretended he was Johns’ best friend. Fred thought John was being petty for not wanting to be best friends with this clear user and wanting to get away from him. Just silliness

Shevey could have just said ‘I was intimidated by his confidence, wit and physical appeal’ but instead she decided to write a whole slanderous trashy book. 

Ah the hypocrisy. Lewisohn gives Paul some light criticism (along with Stu!) about his letter format? and this is unacceptable. Paul takes numerous pot shots at John (criticises his lack of literary nature, lack of handiness around the home, takes credit for Ticket to Ride for some reason) in the lyrics book and anyone who questioned it was completely shot down. Surely this double standard is apparent?

“On 27 March, Stuart wrote a letter looking to get the group a holiday camp booking … and as if in competition, which he was, Paul also wrote one that same day or soon after. Both are indicative of their hopelessness, for - as Rory Storm and the Hurricanes thrillingly knew - summer seasons had already been tied up a month or more. Paul’s was another masterpiece of dressing: this time he made no mention of personnel, obscuring altogether the question of a drummer, and added one to every calculation - the boys were ‘eighteen to twenty’ and had been together for four years, time in which they had ‘acquired three very importance things - competence, confidence & continuity’. Stuart’s letter was also verbose, and more intense. The recipient couldn’t have had many letters from rock groups that began 'Dear Sir, As it is your policy to present entertainment to the habitues of your establishment…’”

— The Beatles: Tune In, by Mark Lewisohn, on Paul McCartney and Stuart Sutcliffe’s attempts to book a spot at a holiday camp for the band to play

"Possibly I (would) have to marry a very rich old lady... Or man, you know, to look after me.": John Lennon's interview for French TV at Sutton Place, New York, April 5, 1975.