MovieChat Forums > J. Edgar (2011) Discussion > Helen made Hoover go gay

Helen made Hoover go gay


Some guys just cant take rejection well and clearly Hoover was one of them.

It's very clear that he was a heterosexual in the beginning but when Helen turned him down it made him hate women.

However, it's a possibility that Hoover still had some straight-ness in him because he admitted to Clyde that he wants a wife, and even with the kiss, Hoover was uncomfortable with it (at first) but after Clyde left, I guess that's when he fully became gay...

IDK, hell, this crap is just confusing. That homoerotic love story ruined a VERY POTENTIAL Winner.

tRuE sTAR LeGEnd

reply

[deleted]

Um...your animosity towards my statement is drawing the conclusion that you happen to be a homosexual?? I doubt a fellow heterosexual would get angry about that.

And for the record, Im not a gay basher, I just don't like how they incorporated that side of his life into the movie, when I went in the theater expecting an action-packed crime drama.

tRuE sTAR LeGEnd

reply

And for the record, Im not a gay basher, I just don't like how they incorporated that side of his life into the movie, when I went in the theater expecting an action-packed crime drama.

If you'd seen the trailers and read some articles on the movie, you would have known that it isn't an action-packed crime drama, but focuses on Hoover's relationship issues. I guess most of those people who came out of the theatre disappointed just had wrong expectations.

reply

[deleted]

@mhearn, okay dude...whatever makes your boat float....you sound a bit pessimist and hostile...but alright, whatever...

and PLEASE dont call me darling. I'm straight.

tRuE sTAR LeGEnd

reply

PLEASE dont call me darling. I'm straight.

TrueStarLegend.... you just can't help bad luck now can ya!

reply

[deleted]

"Darling!" sounds very passive aggressive, and you are nothing if not aggressively bitchy and aggressively ill-informed about facts.

However much you want J. Edgar Hoover to be gay, the fact is there is no evidence to support that theory, only one opportunistic woman's testimony and a lot of busy-body gossip.

He might have felt homosexual attraction to men, he might not have. There is certainly no reliable account that he acted on any possible tendencies he had.

Why would a gay person be so desperate to believe this monumentally evil man was homosexual? That's like a vegan insisting that Hitler never touched meat.

^
Those who try to make distinctions between education & entertainment know little of either.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

"Man 1: "My mother made me a homosexual".

Man 2: "ĂŹf I give her the pattern will she knit me one too?"

reply

[deleted]

What's with you guys? Some people swing both ways you know! For all you know if he had married Helen, he might have kept whats-his-name on the side. It does happen.

reply

[deleted]

The way it seemed to me is that Edgar wanted a wife because that is what he was "supposed" to do. Not out of any kind of romantic notion. Back in those days, men worked hard got married and had kids. I felt that he wanted to keep up appearanced, to show that he was the "norm".

He knew how homophobic his mother was, how the world was. He was never going to have a star law enforcement career if people knew he was a "Daffy". It would break his mothers heart if he embraced his true sexuality. From the way it's portrayed in the movie, from her Daffy story, I got the impression that she knew which way he was inclined, but was warning him that she was against it.

Plus it was against the law back then for men to engage in homosexual relations.

I don't think he "turned gay" because of rejection, for one that's just not how it works! Plenty of people get rejected everyday, they don't switch teams! I think Hoover struggled with his homosexuality, everything around him was telling him that what he felt was wrong, so he tried to resist.

I found this part of the storyline to be quite interesting, as I never knew that Hoover was gay, what little I did know about him (I'm an Aussie) was that he was responsible for the creation of the FBI, kept files on EVERYBODY who was anybody, and that he was a closet crossdresser.


You're Perfect Yes It's True.... But Without Me You're Only You

reply

Exactly. Well except for the "closet crossdresser" part, I couldn't find any serious source to back that up.

reply

It was only something I heard over the years, I never really researched Edgar before seeing this movie. Am interested to learn more.


You're Perfect Yes It's True.... But Without Me You're Only You

reply

For more interesting facts, read the "Hoover Bible" - Curt Gentry, J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets. A very well-researched biography, and also a nice read.

reply

[deleted]

No, he had a choice.

Can you fly this plane?
Surely you can't be serious.
I am serious,and don't call me Shirley

reply


You could care less, huh? Is that your not-so-subtle way of saying you already care a lot? Or a round about way of letting people know you barely grasp colloquial English?

I could NOT possibly care less than I do about your response, daffy.


I still believe. Do you still believe? - Earl Hickey

reply

It's quite often amusing to see people make fools of themselves here. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the construction "I could care less". In fact its use dates from around a hundred years ago in the Jewish parts of NYC.

If you ever did any reading beyond comics you'd know that; I'd heard it often in films before I bothered to research it.

Do make an effort to get over yourself. Just because you think something is true it's not necessarily so, and often bespeaks a lack of fluency in English.

reply

Nice try, I can use wikipedia too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_popularity

Conversely, just because a bunch of ignorant ethnics used it that way when trying to learn English does not make it correct. The fact that you used an underpriviledged, immigrant class that was probably just sorting out English for themselves too, as your source of correct English usage is laughable. Your point reads to me like you are saying its ok if the usage is wrong, even if it literally does not make sense, as long as enough people in the ghetto use it. Mind you, 100 years ago, the ghetto was synonymous with the Jewish plight. Guess what? Kids in the ghetto in 2012 think its the height of fashion to walk around with their over-sized pants falling off their butts. Their are so many of them, it must be the way to do things, right? Are you up-to-date on your ebonics too, meshugana? Think on that before you reply.

I still believe. Do you still believe? - Earl Hickey

reply

I've had this argument here before, and I have no intention of repeating the experience. People like you, with but a tenuous grasp of English, are blind to the neologisms, loanwords and - especially in the United Stoats of America - thereby ignore the nuances of the language which have made it pre-eminent in the world.

Your predecessors were too, at one time, "ignorant ethnics", a fact you are too dense to comprehend. Your syntax and general command of the language is appalling, something on which I would not normally comment because you seemingly know no better. I cite "Your point reads to me like you are saying its ok if the usage is wrong, even if it literally does not make sense, as long as enough people in the ghetto use it."

You are betrayed by your use of "your point reads to me...". Plus the lack of an apostrophe and a cretinous belief that English is a black and white language. Have you never marvelled at its ambiguity? Rhetorical question. Ignorance is bliss. Come back to me when you've had more than four decades of professional English and tell me I don't write accurately.

In the meantime, you stupid little fart, grow up and if you must argue with your betters do so on a subject of which you have knowledge.

reply

I've had this argument here before, and I have no intention of repeating the experience. People like you, with but a tenuous grasp of English, are blind to the neologisms, loanwords and - especially in the United Stoats of America - thereby ignore the nuances of the language which have made it pre-eminent in the world.

Your predecessors were too, at one time, "ignorant ethnics", a fact you are too dense to comprehend. Your syntax and general command of the language is appalling, something on which I would not normally comment because you seemingly know no better. I cite "Your point reads to me like you are saying its ok if the usage is wrong, even if it literally does not make sense, as long as enough people in the ghetto use it."

You are betrayed by your use of "your point reads to me...". Plus the lack of an apostrophe and a cretinous belief that English is a black and white language. Have you never marvelled at its ambiguity? Rhetorical question. Ignorance is bliss. Come back to me when you've had more than four decades of professional English and tell me I don't write accurately.

In the meantime, you stupid little fart, grow up and if you must argue with your betters do so on a subject of which you have knowledge.


Bogwart http://www.imdb.com/user/ur4958914/boards/profile/,

I am quite pleased that your factual argument dissolved into a personal attack in a single retort. I must be doing something right. No doubt, its a result of your inherent belief in your superiority, that you totally avoided supporting your own original fallacious argument. I mean, someone with your vast experience could not possibly have made a fourth graders mistake in making a point, right? My faith in rational discourse is not undermined by you though. Your late claim to superiority was not unexpected either. That was quite an irate example of Internet chest-beating at its finest, and to be expected from the desk-chair of an anonymous post. At the least, I can commend you for not challenging me to a penis measuring contest, so something positive can be said of this exchange. In the meantime, you can wring your hands in anonymous anxiety knowing that everyone in this thread is laughing at you and your quite typical forum attack. And yes, you are an example of the typical, not exceptional, in all your ranting here; read your own post again. I read you loud and clear, attack the grammar, do not address the content. I suppose there is an asymptotic relationship between experience and its expression. See, I can couch my point in jargon too, yet I doubt it makes me feel so good as it does you.

You see, I too have had similar discussions before, but the speed with which you resorted to attack is the only thing exceptional about you. You draw down faster than a teenager who is too long between masturbations. Your post can be compared to any teenager ranting and butthurt over being called out on a fallacy, despite your adherence to grammatical form and your inflated self-regard. No doubt, you will be embarrassed about it and delete it tomorrow, so I will quote you for posterity.

United Stoats, I see what you did there. I bet you are 'stroking one out' right now over your own cleverness.

By the way, your written English is quite good.


I still believe. Do you still believe? - Earl Hickey

reply

I can assure you that my written French is superior to yours, for reasons I don't feel like sharing. I don't have much written Spanish or German, but I can offer excellent Portuguese and Cantonese.

It's amusing to see the extent to which you have upped your game, but it's all too late, sadly.

I don't know what a fourth-grader is equivalent to here - probably about ten-years old, at a guess. At any rate it seems to be about the age when the average American is obliged to notice that he really is a major doofus. Not that kids in my country are anything to boast about, having absorbed so much Merkin "culture".

There's absolutely no point in indulging in penis measuring contests. I am not homosexual and not interested in the sexual apparatus of other males, and in any case recent worldwide peer research has demonstrated that the average white American male is very average, being somewhat smaller than his peers in Europe.

So after all maybe there is a correlation between IQ size and todger size. Poor little man, no wonder you have problems coping.

That's it from me; I have no doubt you will want to milk the last few drops out, but as usual you're on your own.

reply

You are correct on one note, I do have problems coping with people spouting fallacies like they are the truth. Penis-size, IQ, the whole country, eh? O wow, I take it back, no way are you 40 years experienced in anything, you ARE a teenager, if not biologically, then mentally, which would make someone your age a retard. I see now, you are European, likely unemployed, on the dole, and sore about your country and its citizens' decline into irrelevance. If the dry wit is any indication, you are British. I see, this is not about me, its about you, your country's current austerity measures juxtaposed to its erstwhile prominence, and your lack of work and declining economy. I get it, I will remove myself from line-of-sight of your self-loathing. Its not so bad, you cannot rule the world forever. Just remember this whole tirade started because you arrogantly believe that 'I could care less', and ' I could not care less' mean the exact same thing. And I could not disagree with you more than I do...or is that I could disagree with you more? Some genius. 'Nuff said.

P.S. 4th graders are 8-10 years old, by the way.

I still believe. Do you still believe? - Earl Hickey

reply

I can commend you for not challenging me to a penis measuring contest
Along with rejection of romantic overtures made to females, remarks like this are responsible for straight males going gay. After all, who else would hold a ruler perpendicularly to their crotch?

reply

[deleted]

Hoover wasn't really gay and there isn't any proof, this was a rumor created by a radical newspaper of the day, bro. He did have a strong brotherly bond with the man, though like Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan in Rush Hour.

reply

When two men talk about loving each other that's rather more than a brotherly bond. But there is no overt sexual activity and it was apparently the writer's intention to show that Hoover was chaste in his relationship with Tolson. Plenty of heterosexuals have that relationship, and I see no reason why a homosexual relationship needs to be consummated either.

reply

Bond...brotherly Bond. (cue 007 theme)

My favorite Hoover anecdote is one from novelist William Styron, who looked over the back fence of his rented house at the Del Mar racetrack next to the Hoover/Tolsen rental and observed Tolsen lovingly painting the nails on his "brother's" pudgy toes. All part of your typical brotherly bonding ritual, I'm sure.

Too bad that wasn't in the movie. It badly needed some laughs.



We don't get that here. People ski topless smoking dope, so irony's not a high priority.

reply

Naomi Watts' role was that of J. Edgar's secretary. Helen Hunt's character appeared once, I think, at a restaurant.


Folk Musician Pummeled

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I know. Nuts isn't it? Reminds me of hardcore evangelicals who claim homosexuality is a choice. I've always felt the only people that could actually make that claim with conviction are highly repressed themselves.

reply