Not sure Godwin’s law really applies here. I mean its not like he’s comparing him with Hitler as he thought was a bit a wingnut or had penchant for silly mustaches, he’s comparing him to Hitler as he was a militaristic despot who waged brutal, expansionist war and had no compunction about wholesale slaughter of civilian populations.
Qualification needed: he tended to be ‘merciful’ in the sense of not holding a person’s former allegiances against them or in not killing doctors who failed to save a patient for whom there was no hope. Military discipline and court intrigues were a different matter. As for not following Greek city-state democracy, why would he? He wasn’t Greek or from a citizen of a city-state.
But yes, he was becoming increasingly a tyrant in his later years. Especially after he declared himself a god (for political reasons- he had taken over the throne of a divine emperor, thus he had to be divine himself) there was much discontent in the ranks among the Macedonians and Greeks who had heretofore seen him as a great man but no more than a man.
Suetonius did repeat the claim that Julius was “…every woman’s man, and every man’s woman.”
But he was a notorious gossip.
Going back to the OP (but not, like, answering it or anything) I have never heard of Audio Murphy being gay.
But the position that guy is taking is completely at odds with countless historical cases. You can look at ANY war in any age and find countless of examples of heroic “manly” acts of war carried out by “gay” men (in quotes as the term is a modern invention and often difficult to apply to people from eras which had different attitudes towards sexuality).
Another counter example would be Wilfred Owen (although writing poetry and being a mans man don’t exactly go hand-in-hand in modern culture either 
).
He was very likely gay (in that two people who knew him well have stated categorically that he was) The citation on his post-houmous MC reads:
Hardly limped wristed liberal effeteness.
Reiterating that I’ve never heard of him being gay or closeted, and in full respect of his contributions to the war, I have to say that gay or straight Murphy was one of the worst actors ever to star in a movie. Just truly A-W-F-U-L.
You cared enough to read and attempt to refute the first link, but then claimed not to have read a second link, yet you felt the need to state: ‘din’t read t’other one’. This made me suspect that you did read it, but couldn’t find anything negative to say.
However, you’ve been asked to withdraw, so rather than pulling you into a situation where you run afoul of the mods, I’m happy to let it drop.
If we’d like another gay-or-bisexual WW1 heroic poet, there’s always Siegfried Sassoon
ETA: I just noted how the quotation function rewrote Owen’s MC citation above. Excellent.
Is Emile Griffith “real man” enough for you? He was welterweight champion and beat Bennie “The Kid” Paret to death in Madison Square Garden in 1962.
He was admittedly bisexual but . . .
Sad but true. Sometimes having experienced war brings out greater qualities in a creative mind (especially, for some reason, the ones who served as medics: Walt Whitman, Ralph Vaughn Williams, Bertoldt Brecht, etc. ), but when Murphy and Bill Mauldin, both afflicted with PTSD, were given the chance by John Huston to bring it out in The Red Badge of Courage,…well, imagine what Montgomery Cliff or James Dean would have done with the part (two non-straight actors who’d never been in uniform). Perhaps that proves Murphy’s het cred.
Audie Murphy killed more Germans than the Black Death. A sober, dry account of Audie Murphy’s exploits reads like a script Arnold Schwartzenegger would reject as too over-the-top.
So if Audie Murphy wanted to fuck men, that wouldn’t make him gay. He’d be SUPERGAY. And you’d be wise to call him Lt. Supergay or Sir.
Hasn’t that been debunked, both here on the Board in the past and elsewhere? I know I’ve read that the sole contemporary written reference was from a political enemy who was being generally snarky.
EDIT: Just saw Bridget Burke’s post above. Yes, I think Suetonius is the reference I was thinking of.
In my experience, men who have positions of power in real life, are usually bottoms . . . and vice versa.
Suetonius per se wasn’t an enemy - he was born over 100 years after Caesar died. He was however a huge gossip who loved nothing more than a good story or a better line. Suetonius was repeating slanderous accusations of Caesar’s supposed affair with Nicomedes of Bithynia, which was calumny designed to make JC look bad. Caesar certainly vigorously denied the charge.
'course just because it was flung as an attack and denied that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It’s hard to prove anything about these historical figures - usually the best you can do as make an educated guess as to likelihood. I’d say in terms of interest in same-sex affairs Julius falls into the uncertain, but possible category along with, IMHO, Richard I. Whereas I’d be inclined to rate someone like William II Rufus as likely and Alexander the Great as extremely likely.
For those doubting there can be a link between ferocious military aggression and, um, openly man-to-man activity, there’s the example of the Sacred Band of Thebes.
If you read the link, the Sacred Band was formed specifically with the idea that the romantic bond would improve military effectiveness, and they kicked Spartan ass at least twice (once while outnumbered more than 3-to-1) before ultimately dying en mass at Chaeronea when they refused to surrender to Phillip II of Macedon in the battle that extinguished Greek independence. Phillip himself was so moved by the sight of their sacrifice he famously pronounced, “Perish any man who suspects that these men either did or suffered anything unseemly.”
A far cry from “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
.
I shall rephrase my actual point being made: There were no primary sources.
I was using irony.
hh
How is that ironic?
Ironic you should mention that.
You have a strange imagination.
A. I haven’t been asked to withdraw. Do you read history the same way you read posts?
B. Sorry that I must disprove your psychic powers, but, I didn’t read the link of wonder. Please re-read my post. I barely looked up the first wiki cite, and only did because it involved some history from my youth. Won’t go on further, because, I was pretty bored then, and even more so now.
C. If somebody makes an offhand comment, about a whitebread topic, you needn’t get all het up about it, using up all your psychic powers to try to prove them a liar. There may be some people on this very board that don’t jump onto every link provided, at the instant it is provided. It may be that if somebody says “I didn’t give a crap enough to read something”…well, my psychologist friends say that it is an indication that they may be actually telling the truth!
You read the rest of my post, but you disregarded the ‘relax…chocolate…TV…’ part, didn’t you???
hh
This is just a guess but I think he’s drawing a parallel between historical accounts of Alexander’s gayness and historical accounts of Jesus.
Ironic part: Saying “That’s good enough for me.” This was, in fact, a lie. I expected that people would understand as much.
The rest of my posts…can’t add much to.
There were no primary sources. Reliable sources used rumour. Not even a lie about catching Alexander blowing somebody.
DtC implied that AtG fucked other guys. Nobody had ever given an eyewitness account. I asked for some. Or, something more reliable than pussified innuendo and rumour mongering; and expected something much more contemporary than 300 years from the point of action (or lack thereof).
Go home. Go to sleep.
hh