User talk:Sujata Kapila/Archive

LISTEN, EVERYBODY, I didn't realize, but there's even no need to wonder if "coach companion" had a sexual meaning :

the meaning of "bed companion" is sexual too : Bacon's mother is not alone to use these words : D'Ewes wrote : "yet

would he not relinquish the practice of his most horrible and secret sinne of sodomie, keeping still one Godrick, a

verie effeminate faced youth, to bee his catamite and BEDFELLOW." So Nieves Mathews looks clever claiming that it is

a "misrepresentation" to state that words such as "bed companion and coach companion" are not evidences of Bacon's

homosexuality, because that's not sexual. Now, it is very clear to me that all her argumentation is false : she is

just one of these biographers of homosexual personnalities who tries desperately to link them to heterosexuality,

because homosexuality is a very bad thing. So it is very not disturbing to quote Mathews in the article : everybody

can see that "coach companion" as well as "bed companion" are evidences of sexual activities and deny that, like NM

is a perfect example of bad faith. The only thing to do is to read the texts to see that NM is not only weak -no

formal proof of Bacon's heterosexuality- but false. The only thing she is able to provide to proove Bacon's

heterosexuality is her intimate conviction. I am definitely convinced that all the primary sources in question deal

indeed with homosexuality. I am very happy : I now know without possible doubt that NM argumentation is

insubstantiated. Is anybody still able to pretend that "bedfellow" had no sexual meaning in mind of Bacon's

contemporary ? I guess not. 90.3.151.138 17:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)