^ Beautiful adjectives there, An Apple Beatle
The "I'd love to turn you on" bit in A Day in a Life , suppose to be er... arousing, i think :-/
It was also hippie slang for turning someone on to drugs. You know, the whole tune in, turn on, drop out mantra of the lazy and unwashed. Anyway, I think that's more of what they had in mind than the alternate meaning.
Overall, I would agree that the Stone's are way more sexual than the Beatles. Not just their music either. I mean, all you have to do is look at Mick to know he's pretty much got only one thing on his mind. Mick and the boys are very raw and base. The Beatles come off as more intelligent and way less aggressive sexually. Now, in their personal lives I'm sure it was a different story, but they didn't project it like the Stones. Their songs certainly aren't dripping with sexual overtones, grunts, and moans like a lot of Rolling Stones songs. Why Don't We Do It In the Road and Happiness is a Warm Gun are the ones I think of as being very obviously sexual. That and the moaning at the end of Lovely Rita. That was inspired.
It's even represented in their choice of logos! More sexual, let's see, the lips and tongue or the granny smith apple? So yeah, sex and the Beatles don't really go hand in hand. Sex and the Rolling Stones though. Uh huh! So yeah, it's not too far of a stretch to think of sex when you're listening to the Stones. Weird reason to listen to one more than the other though. Maybe the dudes Viagra doesn't work for him anymore and he's looking for alternative means of stimulation or something. :X
Here's both bands around 1968. Come on! The image very much matches the music they were putting out. No? Even scruffy, the Beatles give off a wholesome image! Not that they're not sexy though. But in a completely different way. And their music is more positive and uplifting than it is sexual. Which is a good thing cuz really, I think the Stone's became a one trick pony with that stuff. Not much depth overall. Not too many Gimme Shelters in their catalogue.
