Recently, there have been "dozens" of keyword approaches to the blog, concerning B&C sexual issues-- with the vast majority being homosexual references. Yet with nearly 1000 hits to the blog since the August 8th post concerning this-- I don't believe there's been "even 1" comment advanced, by those who've inquired of these likely erroneous B&C rumors-- in response to my addressing them. This leaves me to wonder why??
As mentioned within my welcome to this blog, I speak my mind here and so can you. Could it be that those who are "caught up" in these rumors, would surf the internet in search of something to satisfy their curiosity-- only to run into this post, and feel disappointed in some way that these rumors may not be true?? Or perhaps as I write this, someone is hard at work creating a response that will soon be forthcoming?? Until there is comment from anyone who believes these rumors true, or further-- who may actually "enjoy" reading about B&C sexual innuendo for the fun of it-- I have to assume there won't be one.
I'm polite but not shy, and can be rather direct-- in my comments defending the importance of accuracy within B&C History. Just ask Jeff Guinn. I felt it important to address these B&C sexual rumors and attempt to discern their origin. The sheer volume of response here, based on people seeking out information concerning these "sordid" innuendos-- I think proves the need for such a post having been written.
I sincerely hope all who read this, who used B&C sexual references to get here-- will read my B&C rumors and innuendos post below, dated August 8th. I would be "very" interested to read comments from anyone, who's both keyed in with a B&C sexual reference-- and also read the related post. Please make your comments here, or below after the August 8th post.
I'm curious to know, whether this fascination with B&C rumor-- has a genuine goal in searching for historical truth?? Or rather-- whether this enjoyment of historically charged gossip, is more attuned to some inherent need for "controversy"-- which many may find a compelling element of B&C lore, whether justified or not. Do any of you who've inquired of this topic, have comments regarding the content of my post-- formed in conjunction with 3 other B&C Historians?? Have any questions been answered for you?? Have any preconceived notions of B&C sexuality, been affected by reading this expose'-- which reveals the likely source of these "sordid" rumors, which in reality-- seem to have no basis in truth. I would offer my sincere thanks, for such a reply.
As mentioned within my welcome to this blog, I speak my mind here and so can you. Could it be that those who are "caught up" in these rumors, would surf the internet in search of something to satisfy their curiosity-- only to run into this post, and feel disappointed in some way that these rumors may not be true?? Or perhaps as I write this, someone is hard at work creating a response that will soon be forthcoming?? Until there is comment from anyone who believes these rumors true, or further-- who may actually "enjoy" reading about B&C sexual innuendo for the fun of it-- I have to assume there won't be one.
I'm polite but not shy, and can be rather direct-- in my comments defending the importance of accuracy within B&C History. Just ask Jeff Guinn. I felt it important to address these B&C sexual rumors and attempt to discern their origin. The sheer volume of response here, based on people seeking out information concerning these "sordid" innuendos-- I think proves the need for such a post having been written.
I sincerely hope all who read this, who used B&C sexual references to get here-- will read my B&C rumors and innuendos post below, dated August 8th. I would be "very" interested to read comments from anyone, who's both keyed in with a B&C sexual reference-- and also read the related post. Please make your comments here, or below after the August 8th post.
I'm curious to know, whether this fascination with B&C rumor-- has a genuine goal in searching for historical truth?? Or rather-- whether this enjoyment of historically charged gossip, is more attuned to some inherent need for "controversy"-- which many may find a compelling element of B&C lore, whether justified or not. Do any of you who've inquired of this topic, have comments regarding the content of my post-- formed in conjunction with 3 other B&C Historians?? Have any questions been answered for you?? Have any preconceived notions of B&C sexuality, been affected by reading this expose'-- which reveals the likely source of these "sordid" rumors, which in reality-- seem to have no basis in truth. I would offer my sincere thanks, for such a reply.
Just because you asked 'real nice' I will have to reply. Unfortunately- I am one of the boring folks who didn't really believe any of the claims because I had already read all of the historical accounts that I could get my hands on- including both of John Neal Phillip's books and sort of made up my own mind that it was someone's invention.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you that people have this peverse hang up with subjects like that and once you see or read an "account" it is taken as the gospel truth no matter how far off the mark it is.
I think a more interesting point that I have been kicking around in my head is: Why is it that rumors of sexual behavior particularly follow B&C?
Look at all of the other gangs who were only men-no doubt sharing beds and such, and I am sure that Clyde wasn't the only one who had an unfortunate time in the pen.
I have a feeling that it might have something to do with the fact that unlike Dillinger and the other gangs Bonnie was a full time female member. (Regardless of how much she actually participated.)
So it leads me to conclude that people see a woman involved
and automatically assume some sort of dirty behavior. After all what sort of girl would be in that situation...certainly not a clean wholesome one.
Apparently we have double standards in crime lore too!
I am not by any means calling Bonnie an angel (as most of us girls aren't) but it just bothers me that a negative sexual identity
is the first thing associated with her. As if that is all she had to give...
Well this post went a little off topic...sorry! I am curious as to your thoughts on this-being a guy and all :)
And if you keep bringin' up good discussion topics I will definitely chip in opinions!!
~ Nicole
For the record...I hope that poor bunny made it somewhere safe!!!
Hello, Winston!
ReplyDeleteI have already wrote an email about these "rumors", but I'll transcribe some lines, so our friends can read them too.
"I like your idea of «desmistify» some aspects of this story. Myths are almost related to great personalities and, by system, they have the goal of detriorate the image of those we admire most. We never know their source, where do they come from, but the fact is that these «lies» push away some «addicted». I myself have asked these questions some time ago, and I even sent you an email. It seems some people dedicate their lives spreading lies and trying to justify the things that have no reason. I’m interested by several historical figures and, somehow I end up facing myths of sexual nature (I even think these are the public favorites). Independently of Clyde’s tendences and Bonnie’s sexual life, this couple left a «scar» in the world. They made us reflect about poberty, despair, ambition and pation."
Regards and thank you!
I would agree Bonnie being involved, likely influenced people's perceptions of the Barrow Gang and B&C in particular-- beginning within their own time. I believe a certain amount of sympathy for them, can be attributed to their being a couple, their love affair and Bonnie's presence.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I find 30 keynote inquiries re: B&C sexual lore within one day on one forum-- to be quite remarkable. Most of these entries concerned Clyde being a homosexual-- followed by either Bonnie as a nymphomaniac or W.D. being a homosexual as well. Then there were the Bonnie pregnancy inquiries, followed by an odd assortment of B&C sexual issues-- of one type or another.
These folks were obviously drawn here by the post, which linked up to people's inquires via Google, Yahoo or whatever search engine-- in attracting them to the blog. But that's the point. Look at all the interest regarding these rumors. My question is-- why?? Because those interested, really want to know the truth?? Or rather, are some only looking to to dig up more dirt, to lavish themselves in.
This fixation/fascination, is seemingly endless-- thanks I believe to John Toland. But most I'm sure, don't realize that. They only know what they've heard, or read-- or wanted to hear regarding this. Some I'm sure feel I've gone to greater lengths than I should, in criticizing Jeff Guinn for his creative ambush account and Bonnie prostitution claims. But just as Toland's claims are proof positive to me, of where this sort of irresponsible "creativity" can lead in forming lasting impressions which are wrong-- so too I believe Guinn's claims will be hurtful, well into the future.
Now Bonnie was both a nymphomaniac and a prostitute-- not to mention possibly being pregnant to boot. Between you all and me-- I'm working on that last claim, because I think the truth regarding a Bonnie pregnancy "is" important to history. I've had some respected B&C History types, try and discourage me from pursuing this quest. Indeed some have told me, I should drop my Bonnie pregnancy investigation. They've felt all would be better left alone-- and what difference would it make now anyway?? Well with all respect, I think a big difference.
The families know me, and know I wouldn't look to hurt anyone within my research. I believe it's already clear, that Hamer believed Bonnie to be pregnant-- and that at least, he told Dallas SAC Blake of his feeling in advance of the ambush. Whether Bonnie was actually pregnant or not doesn't seem to matter, from that point of view. I'll let that one stand on it's own, within people's impressions of the ambush posse. The key question there has to be-- did the other 5 know in advance, or was that information withheld from them by Hamer-- until after the shooting stopped??
Now that's a B&C unknown, I as many-- can truly wonder about.
You make several really excellent points, I am one who would side that discovering whether or not she was indeed in a "delicate condition" is worth researching.
ReplyDeleteTruth is truth- it is quite a thought provoking point to wonder if the other men knew that sort of information would events still have unfolded the way they did?
Would she have been spared?
It's the "what ifs" that make history interesting. (And worth researching!)
In regards to people google searching random things, unfortunately I think 9 out of 10 are just gossip hunting...look at the number of people who search wikipedia for answers!!
It is so frustrating while trying to learn myself I have spent 60% of the time weeding through reviews and comments just trying to decern if a book is even worth reading...but at least we can hope that maybe just MAYBE someone stumbles on here and actually learns some information and can pipe up when someone else makes a comment.
But hey, if anything it keeps people visiting!!
Re: Bonnie's pregnancy...its definitely worth looking into whether the other five men knew about her "supposed" condition. Also, if she was pregnant why were the families so insistent she wasn't? I just wonder what they'd get out of that?
ReplyDeleteWhen I saw the movie, back in the 60s, I assumed that the people who alluded to something non heterosexual about Clyde had some inside knowledge that I needed to respect. Now of course, I see it differently. Some people will always put extravagant interpretations on events. Look at the extremely salacious things some people believed about poor Burke Ramsey, who wasn't even 10 when his sister was killed. So, someone sees, interprets, and talks, and other people listen. I think we are veering into the psychological realm of the urban legend here. It is stimulating to hear salacious things, and some people enjoy hearing them and even spreading them. They also enjoy the feeling of being an "insider' with knowledge that wasn't known to the common cdrowd. Gossip is a vehicle that makes us seem special, and 'in the know'. So, these stories gain a patina from repetition over the years that they don't deserve.
ReplyDelete