🏳️‍🌈 Turns out there were a lot of gay soldiers in the Confederacy & they were probably all boinking - Was J.E.B Stuart actually too busy with his gay orgies when he was MIA at Gettysburg? Probably not, but faggots gonna suggest it anyway!

L/A
IMG_2897.webp
Look at that goddamn flamboyant hat. Girl be flaunting!

We know there have always been queer people throughout history. But if we are to believe that fact, it means accepting an uncomfortable truth: not all of them were good!

As much as we would like to think that belonging to an oppressed group requires one to carry empathy for others, that’s not always the reality. Some gay people side with the oppressors, and actively fight on their behalf.

A publication called the Milwaukee Independent recently explored this phenomenon in regards to the Civil War, and the possible queer identities of Confederate Army leaders. Given the contemptuous attitudes about homosexuality in the 19th century, extracting any concrete clues about the queerness of Civil War figures is a challenge.

Adding to the difficulty, men from that era often wrote to their male friends in flowery and grandiloquent language, which we would now associate with romance.

Still, those obstacles haven’t stopped historians from trying. One Confederate figure known for his flamboyant flair was J.E.B. Stuart, a general who wore a “red-lined gray cape” and his “hat cocked to the side with an ostrich plume,” along with a “red flower in his lapel.”

Stuart’s ostentatious garb solidified his reputation as a “Gay Cavalier,” though his peers thought he was trying to attract the female eye.

Riiiiight.

Stuart was “fond of show and with much personal vanity, craving admiration in the parlor as well as on the field, with a taste for music and poetry and song, desiring as much the admiration of handsome women with full appreciation of his won well-won eminence,” according to a description written by a member of Stonewall Jackson’s staff.

One of those “handsome women” was Stuart’s wife, with whom he owned slaves. He died in 1864 at 31 years of age with his wife, Flora, by his side.

Five years ago, Stuart’s name was back in the news, when his statue was removed from a park in Richmond, Virginia.

Though nearly all commanders for the Confederate and Union armies were partnered, one notable bachelor was Richard S. Ewell, who curiously didn’t marry until late in life. Ewell eventually wed a friend of his from high school, who cared for him after his amputation in 1863.

While some reject attempts to glean the sexual identities of malevolent actors, the Milwaukee Independent argues the exercise helps construct a more complete historical picture.

“The exploration of sexuality [doesn’t] serve as an endorsement of the Confederate cause,” the article says. “Rather, if it pushes the public to acknowledge that historical narratives are messy and filled with contradictions, it might serve an instructive purpose. LGBTQ+ history is broad and complicated, spanning every social class, race, and creed.”

With that in mind, it’s worth mentioning there were also probably queer figures on the Union side, including one very famous leader.

While we can’t definitively say Abraham Lincoln was gay, we’re pretty certain he shared his bed with men on multiple occasions. The documentary Lover Of Men: The Untold History Of Abraham Lincoln explores our 16th president’s bond with his close male companions.

Then again, as the doc explains, our world was much more homosocial back then. Men and women socialized separately, which meant it was more common for male relationships to be intimate and physical.

“In combing through Civil War battle records of Confederate and Union soldiers, I find, they were not only slaughtering one another–many were also loving one another,” writes Reverend Irene Monroe in her 2016 retrospective, “The untold history of gay Civil War soldiers.

Telling their stories helps broaden our understanding of history, and how queerness is interwoven in our nation’s fabric through the good and the bad.
IMG_2898.webp
It’s about the implication.
 
One of those “handsome women” was Stuart’s wife, with whom he owned slaves. He died in 1864 at 31 years of age with his wife, Flora, by his side.
He died before she got there.

She also never remarried and wore mourning garb until her death nearly 60 years later in 1923.

Though nearly all commanders for the Confederate and Union armies were partnered, one notable bachelor was Richard S. Ewell, who curiously didn’t marry until late in life. Ewell eventually wed a friend of his from high school, who cared for him after his amputation in 1863
His amputation was in 1862. And also he spent his twenties and thirties on the frontier, escorting settlers on the Oregon Trail, and then he fought in the Mexican-American War... not really a place to find a nice lady to marry and settle down.

So... factual errors and biased assumptions. The absolute state of journalism...
 
At this rate how long will it be before these idiots start claiming sean connery was gay and the whole ladies man thing was an attempt to hide it because of the garish clothes he wore in highlander. Totally secretly advertising the truth and all that
Forget Highlander, look at what he wore in Zardoz.
 
At this rate how long will it be before these idiots start claiming sean connery was gay and the whole ladies man thing was an attempt to hide it because of the garish clothes he wore in highlander. Totally secretly advertising the truth and all that
You’re about 4 years too late.
 
I give it five years before Prager U and Turning Point types uncritically ape this premise.
 
Reminder that the job of author Alex Reimer (lol x2) at Outsports was to write nonstop celebrity gossip about how such-and-such athlete might be homosexual. And despite what remains of the fanbase having zero interest in this, somehow Disney/ESPN, MSNBC, sports radio and others constantly featured this stuff.

Now he does the same thing at Queerty, just on a broader scale.

Wyświetl załącznik 7185079 Wyświetl załącznik 7185081

Wyświetl załącznik 7185084
here's his fastpeoplesearch if anyone is interested.
 
Whoever wrote this article must have unironically watched Buckbreaking one too many times.
 
This is all meant to be a humiliation ritual by the queers to utterly destroy these men, and after death too. Shame on them. Always remember that they hate you, your ancestors, and your history. And they also want to humiliate them and you, and think it’s funny.
i swear to god, the gays are obsessed with sex. every single thing, no matter how innocent or innocous HAS TO be turned into some fucking sexual thing.
Well that’s the entire thing with faggotry. Faggots are inherently sexual creatures, much more so than the average person. The entire basis of faggotry is putting your cock in the place where people shit. There’s a reason why they molest so many kids.
 
I don't know that turning the US civil war into a conflict between anti-slavery straight people and a bunch of degenerate buck-breaking slave-owning gay southerners is going to do much for "the cause".
 
Tumblr brainrot drives so many people to make gay fanfiction. Its even worse when they try doing it to history. You know you have a problem when a gacha game about rolling for waifu'd versions of historical figures is far more faithful to history than the establishment.
 
All the Nazis were gay!
All the Confederates were gay!


Is the fact that the villain's of history were all apparently faggots not just more proof that gays are bad? Maybe we should jail all faggots them before they do another act of historic evil?

Really I'm not sure what the takeaway is supposed to be from these articles that pop-up all the time, to get people to hate faggots?
 
The argument for J.E.B. Stuart being gay is that he was apparently vain and wanted to look fashionable while his cavalry cut people down on the battlefield.

0.png

It's also sad to see "Abraham Lincoln was really a queer" brought up for the 50th time now in an article. History is nothing but a series of sexual rendezvous and casual hook-ups to some people isn't it.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
I thought he was from Boston. Last purchased in 2005 means this must be a rental, right? Purchased for 588k, worth 1.1M, but only 476k in equity after 20 years?

The appreciation alone was more than that, so even if the owner put down the bare minimum and (somehow) only paid interest for 20 years, he should be further ahead. Must've pulled as much equity as he could, so instead of a windfall from the value doubling, he's 2/3 through his mortgage and owes 650k, more than the house originally cost. Better hope values never dip...
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole