Talk:John Maynard Keynes

British?

Why is he British and not English? He was born in England to English parents. I can almost guarantee you had he been born in Wales or Scotland, there'd be no way under the sun he'd be allowed to be called British. He'd be Welsh or Scottish all the way. Have a look. I've yet to see one Welsh or Scottish person on this website described as British. Yet, at least half the English people I've read about here are labelled British. It appears the poor English seem to be some crude base type or template on Wikipedia which all other more worthy nationalities can build upon. A mongrel race or something. Or someone is ashamed to say they are English in case they what? Offend somebody? What's the story? Peter Greenwell (talk) 11:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Reception

Russell said that Keynes was very intelligent. Do you really think that this is "reception"? --13Peewit (talk) 08:20, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

No mention of bisexuality?

That's pretty amazing. Bisexuals are ever so more prevalent. Is this a bias issue by WP:RS? Or editors? Anyway, I'll put it on my "Do list" to research and add in if WP:RS found. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 16:22, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Did Keynes ever identify as bisexual? I know he is sometimes seen as one of the great bisexuals of history, but in his own estimation he was strictly homosexual until meeting Lopokova, and many would probably call that a lavender marriage anyway. It's not something the Bloomsberries discussed in great deal—whether they were gay, or bi, or straight, just who they tended to like—wouldn't a majority of sources just be people saying "I think he was bi", "I think he was gay" and some contemptible "I don't think we can use these terms" people. It's tricky because we can't see inside his living mind, and the only personal attestations he made as to his sexuality were to the effect of saying he was proudly gay, barring speculation about whether or not he fancied Costelloe.Zythe (talk) 09:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

You're mostly right there Zythe, though let me qualify a little. In his teens and twenties Keynes did indeed seem to be as gay as can be. His diary's and letters have detailed accounts of homosexual encounters with dozens of men. To the best of my knowledge there's no unambiguous evidence he had full sex with a woman as a youth, or a self identification as a bisexual. As for Lydia, you're right many might infer it was a lavender marriage. But according to Lydia's own letters, she was in fact very sexually satisfied (admittedly she does make references to things like Keynes "magic finger" , but they did also have quite frequent full sex in at least their early years, with medical complications preventing a pregnancy carrying to term.) And also multiple statements from third parties confirm the marriage seemed very happy.

The best secondary source, with very detailed and graphic accounts of Keynes sex life, is the original 3 volume biography by Lord Skidelsky. Keynes is a good example for modern research into sexuality, which finds that for some, there can be dramatic changes in orientation as we progress through life.

So Id be against prominently describing Keynes as bisexual, as while essentially correct, it may give the wrong impression. Our article already treats this aspect of Lord Keyne's life in the same way as most major modern sources – mentioning his active homosexual youth, and then his later faithful and happy marriage. FeydHuxtable (talk) 11:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

ps. thanks to CarolMooreDC for raising the issue. Always good to be vigilant against bias. It's just Lord Keynes was a most atypical sort of bisexual. FeydHuxtable (talk) 11:48, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think he was a bisexual at all. For the first part of his life he was exclusively homosexual, then for the latter part apparently exclusively heterosexual and apparently faithful to his wife. You can't just sort of average these out into "bisexual". That would mean he was always sexually interested in both men and women, but that was definitely not the case, not at any time in his life. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 11:57, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's a question of "averaging".... bisexuals by definition are people who are attracted both to men and women. The order in which that occurs isn't really relevant. Whether he self-described as bisexual doesn't seem terribly important, as long as someone else does. The terminology to describe sex has varied quite a bit over time, and obviously we need to be careful about labelling people's behaviour in the past by modern standards, but it would seem to me to be entirely appropriate to say that he was bisexual, with a pronounced preference for men as a youth. Peregrine981 (talk) 12:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Saying that would be correct IMO, but there's also the matter of due weight. Major biographies don't describe Lord Keynes that way, and we ought not let ourselves be overly influenced by the recent media storm caused by a historian who despite spending years attacking LK's legacy, admits he forget the only reason Keynes was childless is that his wife miscarried and was then advised by Drs she would be unable to carry. On the other hand, if a majority of you want a more prominent statement I've no strong objection. Its great for the LGBT crowd to claim arguably the 20th century's single most positive influence as one of their own.  :-) FeydHuxtable (talk) 12:49, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

If found three book sources describing him thusly and a couple mentioning it. I'll have to study and see if those are stronger than the WP:RS on homosexuality and thus need section title change; or if they are just an addendum that others also call him bisexual. Will check in next few days. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 13:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The fact that he was unquestionably LGBT has nothing to do with the question of whether he was bisexual, which can't be answered. It's not about a gay agenda, FH!Zythe (talk) 09:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps there is some nuance that I'm missing, but doesn't LGBT include bisexuals? I think it can be said, without too much hand-wringing, that someone who says they are attracted both to men and to women, and acts to the point that they have apparently fulfilling sexual relationships with both, is bisexual, even if they have a general preference for one or the other. There's plenty of sources saying he's bisexual. I'm sure people have spilled plenty of ink discussing whether he was "really" attracted to women, but it seems to me that the preponderance of evidence suggests a bisexual orientation, and that it isn't really up to us to dissect his innermost thoughts. Peregrine981 (talk) 09:41, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

But given we cannot claim with certainty his innermost thoughts, other than those he wrote down, can't we just be happy with LGBT? I'm as sensitive to bisexual erasure as anyone - honestly - but at least LGBT acknowledges there is ambiguity around a specific orientation.Zythe (talk) 12:30, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Better late than never, 3 high quality refs mentioning his bisexuality; more are found with google search of his name and the term. Maybe I'll put in a little something with the refs if no one else wants to.

• John Maynard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace,Indo-European Publishing, 2011, ISBN 160444116X, 9781604441161. Back book notes
• Milo Keynes, Editor, Essays on John Maynard Keynes, Cambridge University Press, 1979, ISBN 052129696X, 9780521296960, p. 65
• David Warsh, Economic Principles: The Masters and Mavericks of Modern Economics,Simon and Schuster, 2010, ISBN 1451602561, 9781451602562, p 3. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 14:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Relationships/Marriage

Hi community. I have a small issue with the article's structure which I would like to get other editors' views on. I personally feel that Keynes' marriage should be included within a broader "Relationships" section (two paragraphs at the moment) which places the marriage within the context of his earlier affairs, and gradual maturation (the lovely biography quote about renewed zeal for life etc.). There is also the fact that the Lopokova period of his life was not monogamous, but rather overlapped significantly with one of his male lovers, at least pre-nuptials as far as we can tell. I also feel that having the Lopokova relationship follow on from the Keynes quote about his feelings for Strachey provides a nice albeit ambiguous context to the relationship: that Keynes either fell majorly in love with her unexpectedly, or that it was a lavender marriage or in some sense motivated by careerism. Obviously Wikipedia shouldn't suggest either, but I felt that the including these paragraphs in one section makes for a much richer context to the marriage. Another editor feels that because marriage as an event is of special significance in itself, the Keynes-Lopokova relationship should have its own separate subsection, whereas I feel it earns its significance by dint of his previous affairs.Zythe (talk) 13:42, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

To understand how to best describe Keynes for our readers, it's close to essential to be familiar with the best secondary sources. At a very minimum, one should have read Lord Skidelsky's one volume biography. I don't see how anyone could have done this and still feel that Keynes had a lavender marriage. As Skidelsky and other major biographers relate, he fell deeply in love with Lydia. Skidelsky and others include numerous quotes showing his ongoing enchantment with her. Yes he still had sex with men for years after their first meeting, but after marrying he remained totally faithful. Lydia was sexually satisfied. The marriage was in many respects more significant than all Keynes earlier relationships combined. Not in sexual terms , but in the overall influence of the relationship on his life. Certainly biographers spend more space describing the marriage that they do all his previous sexual relationships. As well as satisfying Keynes strong desire for affection, devotion and loyalty, the marriage was crucial to Keynes's work, especially in his last years when his health was failing. As Skidelsky describes, Lydia's support was vital to Keynes as he laboured at Bretton Woods to help set up Embedded liberalism , or later when he negotiated post war loans for Britain. Turning to another recent biographer, Peter Clarke (2009) say on p56 that the marriage gave Keynes "a new focus, a new emotional stability and a sheer delight of which he never wearied". It absolutely deserves its own sub section.

All that said, you were spot on with your earlier remarks about the young Keynes being very likely 100% actively and enthusiastically gay. If you want to add a little more emphasis on that, go ahead. But please leave the marriage subsection. FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:46, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

That sectioning looks good to me.

On another note, in the photo labeled Painter Duncan Grant with Keynes. I really am not sure which one is which. They are both tall and both of their noses look shorter than in older photos of Keynes. Could that be explicated? Thanks. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 00:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Carol, 'tis done. FeydHuxtable (talk) 06:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

It isn't about emphasising gay love affairs more, as you seem to be implying - I said the alternative to lavender marriage was it was a quite extraordinary case of falling in love with a woman. Both these things are enhanced by the paragraphs being presented in one continuous section. The fact that it gave Keynes "a new focus, a new emotional stability and a sheer delight of which he never wearied" is not in question; indeed, I said that the significance of the marriage is all the more for the context of Keynes' earlier affairs. To say that Keynes earlier affairs were unimportant isn't quite right — through Macmillan he became published, through Strachey he met the Bloomsberries, and so on. "The love of a good woman" isn't especially notable, nor is the love of any of those other lovers - the marriage is not underrepresented by being included as part of a larger section about his various love affairs.Zythe (talk) 08:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

It's not extraordinary for a bisexual to fall in love with a member of the opposite sex. Or for a person who has had one sexual orientation (straight or homosexual) for first 20 or 30 years to find out they really were bisexual the whole time but didn't know it. Let's not impose the strict gay or straight dichotomy on the article since so many people are bisexual and don't know/won't admit it til later in life. CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 13:06, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

How about removing the gay stuff from the article?

I think it's worth at most 2 sentences. Do the Ronald Reagan and Werner von Braun articles go on and on about their intimate lives? It's off-topic. SPECIFICO talk 13:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I emphatically agree. This stuff is not material to Keynes' work as an economist and there is very little public awareness of his lovers, etc. This discussion may be a case of WP:Soapbox. Steeletrap (talk) 13:42, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Just as long as you leave in the bisexual stuff. It's such a suppressed topic on wikipedia already! CarolMooreDC - talkie talkie🗽 13:50, 31 May 2013 (UTC)