LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksand you and your family did what for irish independence?Originally Posted by oreiley1
and you and your family did what for irish independence?
Having read Jeffrey Dudgeon's edition of the Black Diaries, I have no doubt they are authentic. There is just too much detail for any forger to have bothered with, and correspond in terms of time and place with the White Diaries about which there has been no doubt.
I think it is necessary to remember the times he lived in. People's private lives were not investigated by tabloids. We now know the Prime Minister Lord Rosebery (1894/95) was bisexual, as was Edward VII's brother-in-law the Duke of Argyll (died 1914), but you can be sure most contemporaries had no idea.
The accusation of paedophilia is misleading. There is no evidence whatever that Casement was attracted by little children. His sexual activities tended to be with teenagers, yes, and nowadays we would regard that as exploitative. But he met them on the streets and they may well have had such experiences before. Read the diaries and see if you think he ruined their lives.
The accusation of paedophilia is worrying. If the boys were less than 16 then that is totally unacceptable, and if 16-18 then that is very dodgy (assuming that Casement was in his mid age at the time).
RIRA not in my name-Traitors to Ireland MMcGuinness; People are entitled to cultural & social equality MLMcDonald; We have a length to go understanding unionism GAdams
Easiest thing in the world to blacken somebody's name after they have done you the favor of dying and are not around to defend themselves. The word 'Paedophilie' applies to prepubescents so we can stop that one right now.
As for sex slurs, i mentioned allegations against Pearse, i also recall there were attempts made to portray Collins as gay a few years ago.
I see the classification of gay as a way of marking Irish nationalist icons in a negative way as this is how it will be perceived and received and as such is a part of a counter-cultural effort (the usual suspects behind the financing and promotion of it). The following article describes an Irish documentary made a few years back about how Celtic warriors were bisexual...
Celtic warriors ‘were bisexual’ - Times Online
In it (according to the series) he uncovered evidence of Prima Nocta taking place in Ireland in the 19thC in which the daughters of tenants were given over to landlords for sex on their wedding night, his revisionist pro-British instincts of course used to enable him to interpret this as concensual and a sign of the Irish being 'uninhibited' in some way - to tie in with a theme of sexual liberalism he suggests it is evidence of some kind of sexual liberalism in Ireland which the CC just had to come along and 'spoil' in the 20thC.
As for a damascene conversion of UK officers and officials, maybe it was the day to day business of soldiering an empire and occupying people in general. Childers witnessing the Boer war, Casement the extremes of colonial depravity in the Congo. Maybe some of them just became completely dissillusioned with the whole bloated, racist, suffocating empire in itself - perhaps they saw in a small country struggling for self rule a nobility and a dignity that simply transcended everything Britain was aiming for in expanding it's empire.
Pearse certainly wrote homoerotic poetry, but probably never realised he was homosexual or did anything. To say that he had homosexual tendencies is not an allegation, it is a historical point of view. History is about truth, it is not about reinforcing your political views.
It is hardly news that there was bisexuality and homosexuality in Gaelic Ireland, or that the jus primae noctis was occasionally practised in Ireland. Have you seen the film, that you claim portrays it as consensual? It would hardly be a jus (right) if it was consensual.
Why would it be 'hardly surprising' that prima nocta occurred in 19thC Ireland? I hear no mention of this taking place in Britain during the same period or continental Europe...It is hardly news that there was bisexuality and homosexuality in Gaelic Ireland, or that the jus primae noctis was occasionally practised in Ireland.
I am going by the article which states the following about the practice....Have you seen the film, that you claim portrays it as consensual? It would hardly be a jus (right) if it was consensual.
“Ireland would have been one of the most uninhibited countries in Europe before the church got a stranglehold on the country,” said Duggan.
He sees this as 'uninhibited', a sign of sexual libertarianism. I see it as non-concensual, as do you.
Perhaps you would care to reproduce some of this verse to back up your point, the only source i have heard that endorsed this was RD Edwards and she cannot be viewed as unbiased with respect to Pearse, the problem with verse and poetry is that it is by definition open to much interpretation on the part of the reader.Pearse certainly wrote homoerotic poetry, but probably never realised he was homosexual or did anything. To say that he had homosexual tendencies is not an allegation, it is a historical point of view. History is about truth, it is not about reinforcing your political views.
The article also states...
He has also found accounts of sexual rituals involving animals.
I cringed at that point, hoping his source wasn't Gerald Cambriensis, though it would have a certain poetic resonance to if it was.
Last edited by Thranduil; 10th February 2009 at 11:23 PM.
What on earth has that got to do with anything? The guy was gay and Padraig Pearse was gay.
I never said that. I was referring to the "occasional" practice of the jus primae noctis, and was not referring to the 19th century. I agree if it was practised in the 19th century it would be surprising, and I suspect that if the film found evidence for it that was the only case there was.
How about 'Little Lad of the Tricks':Quote:
Pearse certainly wrote homoerotic poetry, but probably never realised he was homosexual or did anything. To say that he had homosexual tendencies is not an allegation, it is a historical point of view. History is about truth, it is not about reinforcing your political views.
Perhaps you would care to reproduce some of this verse to back up your point, the only source i have heard that endorsed this was RD Edwards and she cannot be viewed as unbiased with respect to Pearse, the problem with verse and poetry is that it is by definition open to much interpretation on the part of the reader.
"Little lad of the tricks,
Full well I know
That you have been in mischief:
Confess your fault truly.
I forgive you, child
Of the soft red mouth:
I will not condemn anyone
For a sin not understood.
Raise your comely head
Till I kiss your mouth:
If either of us is the better of that
I am the better of it.
There is a fragrance in your kiss
That I have not found yet
In the kisses of women
Or in the honey of their bodies.
Lad of the grey eyes,
That flush in thy cheek
Would be white with dread of me
Could you read my secrets."
Of course, you could read paedophilia into it, but I am giving Pearse the benefit of the doubt.
Maybe that is the only poem, but some of his other work has homoerotic overtones, e.g.
"One man can free the people, as one man redeemed the world...I will take no pike; I will go into battle with bare hands; I will stand before the foreigner as Christ hung naked before men on the Cross..."
or " I will stand up before the Gall as Christ hung naked before men on the tree!" (The Singer)
and I think there is another one which I can't find at the moment.
Was Pearse gay? I don't know. But if he was gay and remained celibate until his death, then he did no wrong in
the eyes of the Catholic Church.
Earnest, that poem could be interpreted in the way you suggest, point well made.
Reply With Quote