It was a different time and she was more than likely a wig. Which pending I have my slang right (I’m thinking older school gay stuff where men used to marry women for society and then fuck around with men outside of the marriage) means she is a marriage of convenience. But really as far as I know she was basically his hag, and he loved her deeply. Gay remorse stuff - but sometimes people get tired of being “weird and different” and wish they could just be “normal” and things could just “work they way they were ‘supposed’ to work”. And yeah, he could have been wickedly bisexual. And bisexuals - you have every right to exist (and I think there’s more of you than are accounted for. But honestly, it used to be a constant back in the day and I have met a handful of actual wigs who love their gay ass husbands but understand that theirs are a marriage of convenience. At least, the majority of them do.

(p.s. - My gal and I actually think Robert Preston might have been bisexual. But only he *and anyone he slept with if he did sleep with both sides* would ever know. But he for sure was a swell advocate none-the-less. And I don’t think being a song and dance man instantly makes you a sister. Likewise, he might just understand the idea of loving a man and a woman on equal terms as I always joke sexuality ends up having nothing to do with who you could fuck but more so who you could love. But that’s my hot take. Also those two guys from ROPE(!) that Hitchcock flick were gay as hell. And I think they were billed as bisexual. And I think Hitchcock was probably of the lifestyle too, but eh. Who knows?)

(p.p.s. - Oh shit wifey said wigs is for dykes and beards is for gays. Hahahaha! She laughed her ass off at me =P!)