Ugh, whoever wrote that list is a total idiot! It's like the Encyclopedia for the Completely Uninformed View of John Lennon. (Or maybe it was written as a joke to provoke anger from us old Beatles fans.
Anyway, yeah, John did some of those things... but the generalizations that the author makes reveal a narrow-minded bigotry. If John Lennon was a wife-beater, then why not call George and Ringo the same? They were both known to have hit a woman or two. Abused his son? Well, Ritchie was not exactly the most attentive and loving parent to young Zak and Jason... Politically clueless? What does that even mean? Was he running for Senate or something? No, he was an artist in the '70s... politics was theater, politics was infused into everyday life... John just reflected that back to us. He never claimed to have any answer. Talentless?! The author lost all credibility with that one... and the other idiotic claims.
But the total zero of a claim is that John was a pathological liar. Poor memory, perhaps... an embellisher, yeah okay. But not a f@@@in' liar.
Here are the author's claims:
He claimed he had been a working class lad from Liverpool before the Beatles; he was actually raised in a comfortable middle-class home. He denied being married during his early years of stardom. He claimed to have met Yoko Ono at an art show and their love blossomed spontaneously; in fact, Ono had stalked him for months before he gave in to her advances. He claimed to have lost interest in the Beatles due to Paul McCartney’s tendencies toward pop music and dominant role in the group, as well as his desire to do his more avant-garde work outside the band; in fact, he had all but left the band in its last two years as the result of a serious addiction to heroin. When he emerged back into the public eye shortly before his death, he claimed that he had been spending time baking bread and being a stay-at-home dad; in fact, he had been living in a drug-induced haze most of the time.
1. John never denied that he was from a suburban home "a half an inch" higher in the perplexing (to an American) British class system than Paul's council estate.
2. He did first meet Yoko at the Indica Gallery. Her supposed "stalking" of him occurred after that. (And even if they did meet before November '66, tell me one couple who doesn't have an established--if questionable--"creation myth.")
3. "He claimed to have lost interest in the Beatles due to Paul McCartney’s tendencies toward pop music and dominant role in the group" -- Uhhhhm, no
. He claimed that he grew bored, that he knew that the end of touring meant the end of the Beatles, that the loss of Brian Epstein meant the loss of some mystic glue that kept them together, that the Beatles just grew apart. He was John Lennon... a more restless spirit you will not find. And he was not addicted to heroin for the last two years of The Beatles.