Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
4,575
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: + + +
no edit summary
:::::You are taking it personally when it clearly was not intended to be so. It makes no difference who wrote it. If you aren't prepared to have your work edited mercilessly then do not submit it here.
:::::You are taking it personally when it clearly was not intended to be so. It makes no difference who wrote it. If you aren't prepared to have your work edited mercilessly then do not submit it here.
::::::So, getting back to the article itself, what are your thoughts on the issue of whether the conjecture about Edward II's sexuality and specifically whether it should be included in the article and in what form. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 01:21, 22 July 2012 (EDT)
::::::So, getting back to the article itself, what are your thoughts on the issue of whether the conjecture about Edward II's sexuality and specifically whether it should be included in the article and in what form. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 01:21, 22 July 2012 (EDT)
:It has to be mentioned. In a 5 or 600 word article like this though, why go into it in any depth. (The same can be said of [[William Rufus]] and [[Richard I]]. Both of those two could be called "jocks" in its American college sense of the word, who preferred the rough companionship of the field and dressing room to the company of ladies but that's just my thoughts from 50-odd years of reading this stuff. They might have been gay.) One of the reasons for Edward's downfall was the perception amongst the barons of his lack of "manhood" in its chivalric sense of the time. That may not mean he was gay but his friendship and patronage of Gaveston and the younger Despenser especially gave a certain impression. Isabella may have borne him 4 kids but all that means he fulfilled his royal duty. And Isobella's taking up with Mortimer encourages the impression that he was not quite up to it as a male. But to go into this in an article of this size would make it so unbalanced that I you would have to go more deeply into other things - the struggle over Gaveston with Thomas of Lancaster and the wrangling over the Gloucester estate - all very boring stuff and not really needed in an article aimed at teenagers. That he was most like gay or bisexual would not be important enough for a 300 worder, and would be worthy of discussion in a 2500 assignment but in something the size of this article I think it should be mentioned but not made a matter of importance.
:It's a matter of choice really. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 02:25, 22 July 2012 (EDT)