Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

What is it about Johnson’s Tory party at the moment? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited July 3 in General
What is it about Johnson’s Tory party at the moment? – politicalbetting.com

The Tories this year:– David Warburton loses whip over alleged sexual harassment. – Imran Ahmad Khan convicted of child sexual assault.– Neil Parish, tractors and porn. – Tory MP arrested on suspicion of rape. – Deputy chief whip resigns after allegedly groping two men.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,708
    Are they sponsored by Nonce Finance ?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,973
    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,623
    FPT:
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    For me the honest answer I'd have to give is that Brexit has neither made "daily life" better or worse, its pretty indifferent to be honest.

    But that wasn't the point of Brexit.

    I assume you don't travel. Queues, pets, 90 day limit. All impact me, friends and family badly. 3 hour queue in Lisbon, cancelled trip to France as couldn't get dog documents in time, have to plan travelling with a dog weeks/months in advance, 90 day limit completely buggered two friends. One camped in motorhome on son's drive having had to return from EU, another having to go thru hoops re his villa in Portugal and travel limited.
    In daily life I don't travel daily, no.

    I haven't been abroad in a few years due to COVID restrictions but before then typically have one trip abroad per annum, and only a minority of those destinations have been in the EFTA anyway.
    Although it is only a small part of Brexit I think this is what most people will experience as a direct impact of it. There may be invisible benefits of Brexit, but everyone who travels will witness those empty EU gates. I suspect that is why the poll came out with such a large 'worse' number. That may not be fair, but it is a fact of life. It is also clear from the chaos that travel has really kicked off again and the chaos is probably a combination of the leftovers of Covid as much as Brexit.
    Many people are seeing benefits of brexit. The fact you and many on this board aren't is I suspect because most on this board were those that gained from being in the eu.

    Being in the eu there were winners and losers
    Brexiting there are winners and losers

    Some of the winners from being in the eu are now losers.

    In my case I cite pay. Using my pay in 1997 as a baseline below is everytime I changed job and my %pay increase vs my 1997 pay. Many of my friends are seeing similar patterns.

    1997 baseline
    2003 -8.25%
    2007 0%
    2014 0%
    2017 +12.5%
    2022 +32.5%

    What I would be earning if my pay had kept up with inflation since 1997 +97%

    Can I prove its down to brexit....well no but the fact I am only seeing payrises when moving job since brexit happened while maybe coincidental is indicative and with others I know seeing a similar pattern something is happening
    Don't you work in IT?

    If so, I find it frankly unbelievable that your pay in 2014 was 8.25% below what it was in 1997.
    I didnt say it was all percentages are against what I earned in 1997. So in 2014 I was again earning the same as I was in 1997. Like most it workers I go through recruitment agents who try to get the most for their clients as their commission is based on it. Yes before you asked I was constantly updating skills in 1997 I was writing desktop apps using c++ in 2014 I was a full stack developer using .net jquery etc. Simply put the jobs being advertised were all in the same ball park figures so its what you got

    Well, I can only say I have been much luckier than you during that period.

    My other question is about the impact of the EU. During the period you're talking about we (a retail bank) used a lot (and I mean a lot) of offshore developers in India for app development and I acknowledge that that led to pay being suppressed to a degree, although our in-house developers tended to do quite well because their business knowledge made them a key interface with offshore.

    Use of Indian developers was feck-all to do with our membership of the EU, of course.

    Just before I retired a few years ago, serious questions were being asked about the risk of reliance on offshore developers during times of geopolitical upheaval (this was before Covid and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, of course).

    I am not sure how those discussions played out or whether the reliance on offshore has been reduced at all.

    In any event, I am glad your salary situation has improved, whatever the reason.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,623

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    How long do you want to go? Surely it's what is happening in this parliament that is most relevant?
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 4,174
    edited July 1

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.

    I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour. There's a comparison with Corbyn here - his failure to take a tough line on antisemitism (and the suspicion that he had sympathy for aspects of it) no doubt led to an increase in cases within the Labour Party.

    Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,739
    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 10,436
    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.

    I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour.

    Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
    Indeed. Plus the SNP have their own issues with Patrick Grady too.

    All parties have issues, but its quite standard for the Party of Government to have many more visible problems than the Opposition.

    Patrick Grady was far more senior for his party than Pincher, but Pincher is the one that gets the headlines because he's a Tory and the Tories have Downing Street.

    Also the Government obviously have many more MPs, so will have more opportunities for 'bad eggs' as a result.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852
    edited July 1
    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,316
    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    The cliche has always been that Tory scandals are about sex while Labour scandals are about money. So I am not sure this is a new development.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,411

    FPT:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    For me the honest answer I'd have to give is that Brexit has neither made "daily life" better or worse, its pretty indifferent to be honest.

    But that wasn't the point of Brexit.

    I assume you don't travel. Queues, pets, 90 day limit. All impact me, friends and family badly. 3 hour queue in Lisbon, cancelled trip to France as couldn't get dog documents in time, have to plan travelling with a dog weeks/months in advance, 90 day limit completely buggered two friends. One camped in motorhome on son's drive having had to return from EU, another having to go thru hoops re his villa in Portugal and travel limited.
    In daily life I don't travel daily, no.

    I haven't been abroad in a few years due to COVID restrictions but before then typically have one trip abroad per annum, and only a minority of those destinations have been in the EFTA anyway.
    Although it is only a small part of Brexit I think this is what most people will experience as a direct impact of it. There may be invisible benefits of Brexit, but everyone who travels will witness those empty EU gates. I suspect that is why the poll came out with such a large 'worse' number. That may not be fair, but it is a fact of life. It is also clear from the chaos that travel has really kicked off again and the chaos is probably a combination of the leftovers of Covid as much as Brexit.
    Many people are seeing benefits of brexit. The fact you and many on this board aren't is I suspect because most on this board were those that gained from being in the eu.

    Being in the eu there were winners and losers
    Brexiting there are winners and losers

    Some of the winners from being in the eu are now losers.

    In my case I cite pay. Using my pay in 1997 as a baseline below is everytime I changed job and my %pay increase vs my 1997 pay. Many of my friends are seeing similar patterns.

    1997 baseline
    2003 -8.25%
    2007 0%
    2014 0%
    2017 +12.5%
    2022 +32.5%

    What I would be earning if my pay had kept up with inflation since 1997 +97%

    Can I prove its down to brexit....well no but the fact I am only seeing payrises when moving job since brexit happened while maybe coincidental is indicative and with others I know seeing a similar pattern something is happening
    Don't you work in IT?

    If so, I find it frankly unbelievable that your pay in 2014 was 8.25% below what it was in 1997.
    I didnt say it was all percentages are against what I earned in 1997. So in 2014 I was again earning the same as I was in 1997. Like most it workers I go through recruitment agents who try to get the most for their clients as their commission is based on it. Yes before you asked I was constantly updating skills in 1997 I was writing desktop apps using c++ in 2014 I was a full stack developer using .net jquery etc. Simply put the jobs being advertised were all in the same ball park figures so its what you got

    Well, I can only say I have been much luckier than you during that period.

    My other question is about the impact of the EU. During the period you're talking about we (a retail bank) used a lot (and I mean a lot) of offshore developers in India for app development and I acknowledge that that led to pay being suppressed to a degree, although our in-house developers tended to do quite well because their business knowledge made them a key interface with offshore.

    Use of Indian developers was feck-all to do with our membership of the EU, of course.

    Just before I retired a few years ago, serious questions were being asked about the risk of reliance on offshore developers during times of geopolitical upheaval (this was before Covid and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, of course).

    I am not sure how those discussions played out or whether the reliance on offshore has been reduced at all.

    In any event, I am glad your salary situation has improved, whatever the reason.
    Companies I worked for in that period weren't outsourcing however from 2003 onwards what you did notice was a lot of teams had a sizeable number of developers from the eu particularly eastern europe. Now its no longer as easy to get them as they will have to get visa's wages are ticking back upwards in my sector. Still well below what I would be earning if wages had kept pace with inflation. GDP increased while we were in the eu as did company profits but I and many like me weren't getting a share of it. Thats why we voted leave
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,917
    edited July 1

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    Yes, if he tries to get her a cushdy publicly funded job in return.

    Also normally yes for a Foreign Sec from a potential blackmail perspective but given he spent the evenings plotting with billionaire oligarchs in govt offices, that may have been moot.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,316
    Given the prime minister's initials the whole thing feels like another victory for nominal determinism.

    (Although his initials are actually AJ, but whatever, we have a prime minister who uses a stage name and somehow this kind of shit still surprises people).
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.

    I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour. There's a comparison with Corbyn here - his failure to take a tough line on antisemitism (and the suspicion that he had sympathy for aspects of it) no doubt led to an increase in cases within the Labour Party.

    Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
    Oi! Tory HQ pulled in lots of favours to stop the story spreading about Bozza getting a blowjob from Carrie in his FCO office whilst his wife was having Chemo. So stop talking about it!
  • glwglw Posts: 8,777
    When you elect a leader who believes in nothing but being in power — and is willing to say or do anything that aids him gaining power, as well as to turn a blind eye towards bad behaviour amongst those who aid him — then eventually the whole party will end up behaving like the leader, because that's how you get ahead in the Tory party now.
  • eekeek Posts: 21,769
    Pagan2 said:

    FPT:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    For me the honest answer I'd have to give is that Brexit has neither made "daily life" better or worse, its pretty indifferent to be honest.

    But that wasn't the point of Brexit.

    I assume you don't travel. Queues, pets, 90 day limit. All impact me, friends and family badly. 3 hour queue in Lisbon, cancelled trip to France as couldn't get dog documents in time, have to plan travelling with a dog weeks/months in advance, 90 day limit completely buggered two friends. One camped in motorhome on son's drive having had to return from EU, another having to go thru hoops re his villa in Portugal and travel limited.
    In daily life I don't travel daily, no.

    I haven't been abroad in a few years due to COVID restrictions but before then typically have one trip abroad per annum, and only a minority of those destinations have been in the EFTA anyway.
    Although it is only a small part of Brexit I think this is what most people will experience as a direct impact of it. There may be invisible benefits of Brexit, but everyone who travels will witness those empty EU gates. I suspect that is why the poll came out with such a large 'worse' number. That may not be fair, but it is a fact of life. It is also clear from the chaos that travel has really kicked off again and the chaos is probably a combination of the leftovers of Covid as much as Brexit.
    Many people are seeing benefits of brexit. The fact you and many on this board aren't is I suspect because most on this board were those that gained from being in the eu.

    Being in the eu there were winners and losers
    Brexiting there are winners and losers

    Some of the winners from being in the eu are now losers.

    In my case I cite pay. Using my pay in 1997 as a baseline below is everytime I changed job and my %pay increase vs my 1997 pay. Many of my friends are seeing similar patterns.

    1997 baseline
    2003 -8.25%
    2007 0%
    2014 0%
    2017 +12.5%
    2022 +32.5%

    What I would be earning if my pay had kept up with inflation since 1997 +97%

    Can I prove its down to brexit....well no but the fact I am only seeing payrises when moving job since brexit happened while maybe coincidental is indicative and with others I know seeing a similar pattern something is happening
    Don't you work in IT?

    If so, I find it frankly unbelievable that your pay in 2014 was 8.25% below what it was in 1997.
    I didnt say it was all percentages are against what I earned in 1997. So in 2014 I was again earning the same as I was in 1997. Like most it workers I go through recruitment agents who try to get the most for their clients as their commission is based on it. Yes before you asked I was constantly updating skills in 1997 I was writing desktop apps using c++ in 2014 I was a full stack developer using .net jquery etc. Simply put the jobs being advertised were all in the same ball park figures so its what you got

    Well, I can only say I have been much luckier than you during that period.

    My other question is about the impact of the EU. During the period you're talking about we (a retail bank) used a lot (and I mean a lot) of offshore developers in India for app development and I acknowledge that that led to pay being suppressed to a degree, although our in-house developers tended to do quite well because their business knowledge made them a key interface with offshore.

    Use of Indian developers was feck-all to do with our membership of the EU, of course.

    Just before I retired a few years ago, serious questions were being asked about the risk of reliance on offshore developers during times of geopolitical upheaval (this was before Covid and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, of course).

    I am not sure how those discussions played out or whether the reliance on offshore has been reduced at all.

    In any event, I am glad your salary situation has improved, whatever the reason.
    Companies I worked for in that period weren't outsourcing however from 2003 onwards what you did notice was a lot of teams had a sizeable number of developers from the eu particularly eastern europe. Now its no longer as easy to get them as they will have to get visa's wages are ticking back upwards in my sector. Still well below what I would be earning if wages had kept pace with inflation. GDP increased while we were in the eu as did company profits but I and many like me weren't getting a share of it. Thats why we voted leave
    While GDP may have gone up, GDP per capita really didn't...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,973

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    How long do you want to go? Surely it's what is happening in this parliament that is most relevant?
    A couple of parliaments, probably. For one thing, there are far more Conservative MPs than even Labour ones. Then there's new MPs coming in who have not been properly vetted (as much as you can vet) - remember Jared O'Mara ?

    I think there's a combination of issues here. As OGH says, there's the Westminster 'culture' which appears to be poor. Then there's the unusual nature of the job, which requires long periods away from home and family. There's the way MPs get to meet lots of people, often around drink. Also the fact that most people becoming MPs have to be fairly ambitious. And the fact the governing party gets more attention.

    For instance, how about the SNP's Patrick Grady? Labour's Liam Byrne (albeit for bullying)?

    I'd also like to comment again what an odious little creature Tom Watson was.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Given the prime minister's initials the whole thing feels like another victory for nominal determinism.

    (Although his initials are actually AJ, but whatever, we have a prime minister who uses a stage name and somehow this kind of shit still surprises people).

    Boris is his name, I don't get why left wingers get so obsessed about Boris's name.

    I can't remember Tories in the noughties complaining obsessively that Gordon is a stage name and that his real name is James.

    How many people obsessed over Leonard Callaghan?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.

    I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour.

    Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
    Indeed. Plus the SNP have their own issues with Patrick Grady too.

    All parties have issues, but its quite standard for the Party of Government to have many more visible problems than the Opposition.

    Patrick Grady was far more senior for his party than Pincher, but Pincher is the one that gets the headlines because he's a Tory and the Tories have Downing Street.

    Also the Government obviously have many more MPs, so will have more opportunities for 'bad eggs' as a result.
    That we have MPs crossing the line is not party-political or something new. Not that long ago that "I drank too much" was a Labour MP or two in the headlines. Before that a string of Tories. Or Jeremy Thorpe. Etc etc.

    The issue here is that (a) the Tory Party invariably knows that MP x is a deviant and (b) refuses to do anything abut it. Or in the case of Pincher - who reportedly needed a party handler to ensure he didn't get smashed and start ball fondling - they actually promoted him to the whips office - twice.

    This is the partisan bit. There are bad MPs in all parties But the Tories seem happy to both ignore and even promote such behaviour. That the PM liked to get sucked off in his office by his mistress probably explains the air of "so what" in the party.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,932
    A creative interpretation of the Falklands War:

    @EmbassyofRussia
    President Putin on 🇬🇧PM Johnson’s remark that “if 🇷🇺President were a woman, he wouldn't have embarked on war”: M.Thatcher decided to launch military action against Falkland Islands. This decision was dictated by imperial ambitions, strife to uphold imperial status, & nothing else


    https://twitter.com/EmbassyofRussia/status/1542456425586343936
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    Yes, if he tries to get her a cushdy publicly funded job in return.

    Also normally yes for a Foreign Sec from a potential blackmail perspective but given he spent the evenings plotting with billionaire oligarchs in govt offices, that may have been moot.
    Johnson vs Clinton. The latter didn't try to get suckee a 6-figure job.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    "Another odd feature is that so far at least it is mostly confined to Tory MPs."

    Is this actually backed up by the evidence on a longer timescale?

    The by-election in Hartlepool was precipitated by allegations (later confirmed in an Employment Tribunal) against the Labour MP.

    I doubt there is a particular link between political affiliation and being a wrong'un. However, I do suspect that the more recent history is related to the Conservatives having been in office a long time and having a leader who is uniquely poorly placed to insist on high standards of personal behaviour.

    Poor Mr Johnson - it's just blow after blow for him lately.
    Indeed. Plus the SNP have their own issues with Patrick Grady too.

    All parties have issues, but its quite standard for the Party of Government to have many more visible problems than the Opposition.

    Patrick Grady was far more senior for his party than Pincher, but Pincher is the one that gets the headlines because he's a Tory and the Tories have Downing Street.

    Also the Government obviously have many more MPs, so will have more opportunities for 'bad eggs' as a result.
    That we have MPs crossing the line is not party-political or something new. Not that long ago that "I drank too much" was a Labour MP or two in the headlines. Before that a string of Tories. Or Jeremy Thorpe. Etc etc.

    The issue here is that (a) the Tory Party invariably knows that MP x is a deviant and (b) refuses to do anything abut it. Or in the case of Pincher - who reportedly needed a party handler to ensure he didn't get smashed and start ball fondling - they actually promoted him to the whips office - twice.

    This is the partisan bit. There are bad MPs in all parties But the Tories seem happy to both ignore and even promote such behaviour. That the PM liked to get sucked off in his office by his mistress probably explains the air of "so what" in the party.
    The SNP didn't just promote Grady to the Whips office, they made him Chief Whip.

    As you say, it happens in all parties. That the Lib Dems can squeeze into a taxi probably makes it less likely for them.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,547
    edited July 1
    A Tamworth byelection would lead to a question to which the answer seems obvious but possibly isn't: Which party is the opposition? Then answer is obviously Labour. But on the figures that was also true of NS and T and H, and it wasn't.

    I think it's a tricky one, and slightly difficult for the Tories to lose, though on recent form they will try their hardest to come second; but if they were to win possibly both Lab and LD prefer the other to be the gallant runner up.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 2,644
    Suspensions/resignations from party this Parliament due to scandal:

    SNP (out of 48): Hanvey, Ferrier, Grady
    Plaid (out of 4): Edwards
    Labour (out of 202): Webbe, Coyle
    Tory (out of 365): Roberts, Khan, Warburton, Parish… and we wait to see on Pincher

    Proportionately speaking, Plaid are the worst, followed by SNP, then Conservative, then Labour, with LibDem, Green, DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance all clean. Small sample size effects clearly an issue.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852
    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648

    Suspensions/resignations from party this Parliament due to scandal:

    SNP (out of 48): Hanvey, Ferrier, Grady
    Plaid (out of 4): Edwards
    Labour (out of 202): Webbe, Coyle
    Tory (out of 365): Roberts, Khan, Warburton, Parish… and we wait to see on Pincher

    Proportionately speaking, Plaid are the worst, followed by SNP, then Conservative, then Labour, with LibDem, Green, DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance all clean. Small sample size effects clearly an issue.

    Labour also suspended Corbyn
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,109

    Oi! Tory HQ pulled in lots of favours to stop the story spreading about Bozza getting a blowjob from Carrie in his FCO office whilst his wife was having Chemo. So stop talking about it!

    The story they tried to quash was BoZo giving Carrie a job, but the one that was published was her giving him one...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,471

    Given the prime minister's initials the whole thing feels like another victory for nominal determinism.

    (Although his initials are actually AJ, but whatever, we have a prime minister who uses a stage name and somehow this kind of shit still surprises people).

    On a scorecard Johnson's name would be rendered as: "ABdP Johnson".

  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,138
    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 2,644

    Suspensions/resignations from party this Parliament due to scandal:

    SNP (out of 48): Hanvey, Ferrier, Grady
    Plaid (out of 4): Edwards
    Labour (out of 202): Webbe, Coyle
    Tory (out of 365): Roberts, Khan, Warburton, Parish… and we wait to see on Pincher

    Proportionately speaking, Plaid are the worst, followed by SNP, then Conservative, then Labour, with LibDem, Green, DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance all clean. Small sample size effects clearly an issue.

    Labour also suspended Corbyn
    The Conservatives also suspended Julian Lewis, but I was trying to stick to scandals of morality rather than more political arguments.

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,316

    Given the prime minister's initials the whole thing feels like another victory for nominal determinism.

    (Although his initials are actually AJ, but whatever, we have a prime minister who uses a stage name and somehow this kind of shit still surprises people).

    Boris is his name, I don't get why left wingers get so obsessed about Boris's name.

    I can't remember Tories in the noughties complaining obsessively that Gordon is a stage name and that his real name is James.

    How many people obsessed over Leonard Callaghan?
    But Callaghan was Jim to everyone. Similarly Gordon Brown or George Osborne - people who changed their first name from the one on their birth certificate. All very normal, I know plenty of people who have done that. But Johnson is known as Alexander or Al to friends and family. Boris is his stage name. That is a bit weird.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Suspensions/resignations from party this Parliament due to scandal:

    SNP (out of 48): Hanvey, Ferrier, Grady
    Plaid (out of 4): Edwards
    Labour (out of 202): Webbe, Coyle
    Tory (out of 365): Roberts, Khan, Warburton, Parish… and we wait to see on Pincher

    Proportionately speaking, Plaid are the worst, followed by SNP, then Conservative, then Labour, with LibDem, Green, DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance all clean. Small sample size effects clearly an issue.

    Labour also suspended Corbyn
    The Conservatives also suspended Julian Lewis, but I was trying to stick to scandals of morality rather than more political arguments.

    I would consider turning a blind eye to antisemitism to reveal questionably morality, but I get your point.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 4,174
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,758
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I don't want to but I can't help but agree to some extent. Johnson is not a great leader though, he's very poor in multiple dimensions because he is at root a total bullshitter. Many of the great leaders of the past would be brought down by modern media. Also the internet means we see more, so things aren't necessarily worse although they appear that way.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648
    Lab pick up a seat from Con by getting moree of the UKIP vote, red wall finger in the air hint

    Midway (South Derbyshire) council by-election result:

    LAB: 52.6% (+14.8)
    CON: 47.4% (+9.1)

    No UKIP (-23.9) as prev.

    Votes cast: 1,140

    Labour GAIN from Conservative.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,659
    Not all great leaders have terrible flaws. Alfred the Great, Aurelian, Trajan were all pretty fantastic.

    The PM's problem is that he's not a great leader with flaws. Nor even a mixed bag. He's a flawed leader who occasionally gets things right.

    He's the King John of the modern era, with a laundry list of personal and political failures and a tiny number of redeeming features (to be fair, these do include a couple of big items such as the Ukraine response and COVID vaccinations). Nevertheless, he's unworthy of high office and always was.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529
    edited July 1
    PB ETYMOLOGY CORNER

    Why is it called a blow job when you suck?

    Possibly, probably, because the term is a shortening of a phrase used by Victorian prostitutes, when fellatio performed on the client was called "a down below job"

    "'Ere, Lottie, that gent from Newent is asking for a down below job, ow much shall I charge im"

    "Just sixpence, luv, he's a Scot Nat, they're tiny"

    And so on
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    Of course they will!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,471

    Not all great leaders have terrible flaws. Alfred the Great, Aurelian, Trajan were all pretty fantastic.

    The PM's problem is that he's not a great leader with flaws. Nor even a mixed bag. He's a flawed leader who occasionally gets things right.

    He's the King John of the modern era, with a laundry list of personal and political failures and a tiny number of redeeming features (to be fair, these do include a couple of big items such as the Ukraine response and COVID vaccinations). Nevertheless, he's unworthy of high office and always was.

    I'd find it hard to forgive someone who let my baking burn, and I try to be the forgiving sort.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
    I'm stuck in fucking Montenegro. It's BORING. Beautiful scenery, gorgeous sea, medieval villages, MEH

    It ain't Armenia. Armenia is hideous but brilliant
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 875

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    If I've learnt anything about being seen to play with election timings is that it doesn't work.

    May and Trudeau shafted themselves. And any Labour unknown may well be a plus against Johnson's known knowns.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,471

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    It was in the workplace. That's not appropriate, but the main issue is that he tried to give her a job on the public purse.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 4,174

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    I think it's utterly unrealistic.

    Firstly, it would be seen to put the Queen in a deeply invidious position as it would be a government with a sizeable majority holding a very early election purely for opportunistic reasons. I think she'd have no choice but to allow it, but it'd be a terrible look.

    Secondly, it would very easily be portrayed as wholly opportunistic, feeding into existing views about Johnson in a negative way.

    Thirdly, Labour would probably very quickly coalesce around a replacement, either in PLP or via NEC rule changes or both, and that individual would be far more likely to get a short term boost in the opinion polls than a knock, and it would be at exactly the right time.

    Overall, it's just daft speculation - it's not just that it might backfire, it's that it would almost certainly backfire, badly. And the PM, for all his flaws, isn't daft in terms of political tactics and would know that perfectly well.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 8,250

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    Presumably Boris will have numerous visitors to that office. Not very nice for them to have to come into contact with Boris's splatterings.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    Doors weren't really closed enough though were they?

    And it's public jobs and funds for sexual favours. Again. As corrupt as it gets.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,648

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    If I've learnt anything about being seen to play with election timings is that it doesn't work.

    May and Trudeau shafted themselves. And any Labour unknown may well be a plus against Johnson's known knowns.
    I think if he tried to pull that, the electorate would deliver the biggest FU in history. The Tories would be south of 150 seats. Rightly.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 23,117

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Oh God - you're doing it again. Deliberately missing the point and comparing apples and pears.

    Sexual assault is misconduct because it is non-consensual, an assault and a crime, no matter where it happens.

    Sex in the office is misconduct because that is not how a professional behaves at work (and the fact that it is consensual is irrelevant).

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,316

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,708

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    Of course they will!
    I don't think losing Starmer will have any negative effect on Labour at all. His great success has been all internal to Labour.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,368
    I just made a bunch of comments at the end of the last thread.

    Sigh.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 23,117
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
    I'm stuck in fucking Montenegro. It's BORING. Beautiful scenery, gorgeous sea, medieval villages, MEH

    It ain't Armenia. Armenia is hideous but brilliant
    An Armenian love nest, it is then.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Oh God - you're doing it again. Deliberately missing the point and comparing apples and pears.

    Sexual assault is misconduct because it is non-consensual, an assault and a crime, no matter where it happens.

    Sex in the office is misconduct because that is not how a professional behaves at work (and the fact that it is consensual is irrelevant).

    Does a professional play Candy Crush at work?

    Does a professional write on obscure political blogs at work?

    What a professional does at work is surely between them and their employer. If someone has some downtime and the door is closed, what difference does that make?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,109
    One Tory MP blames.... Keir Starmer

    "If there was a strong opposition, Pincher wouldn't have ever been deputy chief whip," he says.

    https://twitter.com/CatNeilan/status/1542805425904652288
  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,403

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
    You're a very funny poster! One we haven't seen the like of since the great 'Lympe Pole' several years ago (his precise name escapes me).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,973
    Scott_xP said:

    One Tory MP blames.... Keir Starmer

    "If there was a strong opposition, Pincher wouldn't have ever been deputy chief whip," he says.

    https://twitter.com/CatNeilan/status/1542805425904652288

    Perhaps he meant opposition to Boris within the party... ;)
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Having spent a couple of decades working for various companies from global blue chips to SMEs, one thing is clear:

    If a colleague catches you having sex in your office, you get the sack for Gross Misconduct.

    No excuses. No "consenting adults" crap. You cannot do that at work. That you are excusing him again is laughable.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I haven't, but I do know many who have (only consensually) who are not sex workers, and that's just from what people have said. I'm past my days of playing "never have I ever" while drinking anymore, but if you were to ask that with people answering honestly, I think you might be surprised how many people would drink.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 8,250

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    I knew a guy who was having sex with the MD's secretary over the MD's desk and the MD walked in on them. Both were sacked on the spot. However, when the guy's line manager found out he went an pleaded with the MD ('boys will be boys', 'we've spent a lot of money on his training' etc.) and he, though not the secretary, was reinstated.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly

    I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?


    OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Having spent a couple of decades working for various companies from global blue chips to SMEs, one thing is clear:

    If a colleague catches you having sex in your office, you get the sack for Gross Misconduct.

    No excuses. No "consenting adults" crap. You cannot do that at work. That you are excusing him again is laughable.
    I think Boris should go, but I thought this line of argument was pathetic in the 90s and I still think its pathetic today. And I'm sorry, but I do know many who have had sex at work. 🤷‍♂️

    I'm not defending Boris, I think he should resign, but I couldn't care less what consenting adults do behind closed doors, and I'm not a puritan.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,660
    @Leon

    Evidence of sinsiter plan beinng enacted by super intelligent AI unwittingly unleashed on the world or self-driving cars being a bit crap? You decide.

    https://twitter.com/urbenschneider/status/1542645823787257856
  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,403

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Perhaps that's because you work from home?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,917

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Having spent a couple of decades working for various companies from global blue chips to SMEs, one thing is clear:

    If a colleague catches you having sex in your office, you get the sack for Gross Misconduct.

    No excuses. No "consenting adults" crap. You cannot do that at work. That you are excusing him again is laughable.
    I think Boris should go, but I thought this line of argument was pathetic in the 90s and I still think its pathetic today. And I'm sorry, but I do know many who have had sex at work. 🤷‍♂️

    I'm not defending Boris, I think he should resign, but I couldn't care less what consenting adults do behind closed doors, and I'm not a puritan.
    How about trying to give your mistress a high paying job? Is that of no concern either?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,660
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Oh God - you're doing it again. Deliberately missing the point and comparing apples and pears.

    Sexual assault is misconduct because it is non-consensual, an assault and a crime, no matter where it happens.

    Sex in the office is misconduct because that is not how a professional behaves at work (and the fact that it is consensual is irrelevant).

    Trying to get your mistress a job whilst concealing your relationship is probably also pretty low down the "Is this professional conduct" list as well I imagine.
  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,138

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    I think it's utterly unrealistic.

    Firstly, it would be seen to put the Queen in a deeply invidious position as it would be a government with a sizeable majority holding a very early election purely for opportunistic reasons. I think she'd have no choice but to allow it, but it'd be a terrible look.

    Secondly, it would very easily be portrayed as wholly opportunistic, feeding into existing views about Johnson in a negative way.

    Thirdly, Labour would probably very quickly coalesce around a replacement, either in PLP or via NEC rule changes or both, and that individual would be far more likely to get a short term boost in the opinion polls than a knock, and it would be at exactly the right time.

    Overall, it's just daft speculation - it's not just that it might backfire, it's that it would almost certainly backfire, badly. And the PM, for all his flaws, isn't daft in terms of political tactics and would know that perfectly well.
    Interesting, thank you.

    The Queen would have to allow it, but yes I don't think she'd like it one bit.

    It probably is just daft speculation and nothing at all will come of it, but a part of me thinks Johnson is bonkers enough, shameless enough, to go for it, should the opportunity arise.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,280
    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
    You're a very funny poster! One we haven't seen the like of since the great 'Lympe Pole' several years ago (his precise name escapes me).
    Avery!
    Yes, he was funny, and blessedly lacking in the collective pulsing forehead vein that seems to infect much of the PB right nowadays.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 23,117

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Oh God - you're doing it again. Deliberately missing the point and comparing apples and pears.

    Sexual assault is misconduct because it is non-consensual, an assault and a crime, no matter where it happens.

    Sex in the office is misconduct because that is not how a professional behaves at work (and the fact that it is consensual is irrelevant).

    Does a professional play Candy Crush at work?

    Does a professional write on obscure political blogs at work?

    What a professional does at work is surely between them and their employer. If someone has some downtime and the door is closed, what difference does that make?
    I have fortunately no idea where you work but I am trying to imagine an employer who would be totally indifferent to whether the staff were having sex with their partners in the office during work hours. Instead of actually doing work.

    And quite a few employers do have rules about social media use and wasting time playing games.

    But you know all of this and are being stupidly provocative because you don't want to admit that the current PM degrades his office and is degrading the party he leads.

  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    I knew a guy who was having sex with the MD's secretary over the MD's desk and the MD walked in on them. Both were sacked on the spot. However, when the guy's line manager found out he went an pleaded with the MD ('boys will be boys', 'we've spent a lot of money on his training' etc.) and he, though not the secretary, was reinstated.
    That's disgraceful.

    I know a case from a business I used to be involved with (before my time there) where a couple had been caught mid-coitus in the car park. The ex-boss had tried to sack her, but not him, but had backed down and sacked neither after she threatened to sue if he did that. I thought then that doing it in the car park was much worse, that's a public space.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 8,250
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly

    I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?


    OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
    Wow. The doctor and the nurse were taking huge risks. Get caught and their medical careers were finished. Presumably you were worth it.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,281
    edited July 1

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    If I've learnt anything about being seen to play with election timings is that it doesn't work.

    May and Trudeau shafted themselves. And any Labour unknown may well be a plus against Johnson's known knowns.
    Trudeau gained five seats.
    He didn't get a majority, but got a completely new four year term with more MP's than he began with.
    Hardly shafting himself.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,316

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I haven't, but I do know many who have (only consensually) who are not sex workers, and that's just from what people have said. I'm past my days of playing "never have I ever" while drinking anymore, but if you were to ask that with people answering honestly, I think you might be surprised how many people would drink.
    Oh I am sure it happens all the time, it has happened at places I have worked, I just think it is both unprofessional and gross.
  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,138
    Insert your own joke about Johnson having a hairdresser:

  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 11,225
    @BartholomewRoberts

    ' I couldn't care less what consenting adults do behind closed doors, and I'm not a puritan.'

    Few on here would disagree, Bart, but context is everything and it just seems another example of sleazy behaviour by a sleazy government.

    It's well past its sell by date, as I think you agree, but we may have to wait for the clock to run down to the end of its term.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,025
    edited July 1

    Suspensions/resignations from party this Parliament due to scandal:

    SNP (out of 48): Hanvey, Ferrier, Grady
    Plaid (out of 4): Edwards
    Labour (out of 202): Webbe, Coyle
    Tory (out of 365): Roberts, Khan, Warburton, Parish… and we wait to see on Pincher

    Proportionately speaking, Plaid are the worst, followed by SNP, then Conservative, then Labour, with LibDem, Green, DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance all clean. Small sample size effects clearly an issue.

    Labour also suspended Corbyn
    The Conservatives also suspended Julian Lewis, but I was trying to stick to scandals of morality rather than more political arguments.

    I think those lists are far from complete - suspect for all parties, and that 'suspension' is a blunt measure. It also depends on your definition of 'scandal', and whether you mean "offences in this Parliament" or "verdict in this Parliament". Some do a pre-emptive runner.

    What's the overlap between scandal, sexual misconduct, harassment, and bullying?

    This is the list of published verdicts where charges were upheld from The Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (ICGS) since the start of 2021. Sorry I don't know how to do a monospaced font on PB:

    We can't rely on an allegations alone as requiring action, since some are not upheld (at least 2 excluded from this list due to 'not upheld' who have been gone for in the media), and others stay in their frontbench positions, or backbench MP roles.

    Date published Reporter Respondent Party Offence
    19/04/21 F Mr Jared O Mara Labour Sexual Misconduct
    20/05/21 F Mr Mike Hill Labour Sexual Misconduct
    25/05/21 M Mr Rob Roberts Conservative Sexual Misconduct
    14/06/21 F Mr Daniel Kawczinski Conservative Bullying & Harassment
    23/09/21 M Mr Keith Vaz Labour Bullying & Harassment
    08/03/22 MMF Mr John Bercow Speaker Bullying & Harassment
    28/04/22 M Mr Liam Byrne Labour Bullying & Harassment
    14/06/22 M Mr Patrick Grady SNP Sexual Misconduct

    Plus at least Fiona Onasanya, and Natalie McGarry who copped two years in prison this week.


  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,917
    Scott_xP said:

    One Tory MP blames.... Keir Starmer

    "If there was a strong opposition, Pincher wouldn't have ever been deputy chief whip," he says.

    https://twitter.com/CatNeilan/status/1542805425904652288

    I am only surprised that they have not also pointed out that the decline in standards in public life can be quite clearly traced back to Nick Clegg breaking the LDs pledge on tuition fees.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,121
    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
    You're a very funny poster! One we haven't seen the like of since the great 'Lympe Pole' several years ago (his precise name escapes me).
    Avery...and yes he was very very good.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I haven't, but I do know many who have (only consensually) who are not sex workers, and that's just from what people have said. I'm past my days of playing "never have I ever" while drinking anymore, but if you were to ask that with people answering honestly, I think you might be surprised how many people would drink.
    Oh I am sure it happens all the time, it has happened at places I have worked, I just think it is both unprofessional and gross.
    OK there we can reach agreement. 👍

    I've never done it myself, because I too think its unprofessional and gross, but I don't think its gross misconduct (unless there are aggravating factors) and I certainly don't think its sexual misconduct.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,973
    Alistair said:

    @Leon

    Evidence of sinsiter plan beinng enacted by super intelligent AI unwittingly unleashed on the world or self-driving cars being a bit crap? You decide.

    https://twitter.com/urbenschneider/status/1542645823787257856

    This happens occasionally with the automated delivery robots in our village. Although the delivery robots are cute. ;)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly

    I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?


    OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
    Wow. The doctor and the nurse were taking huge risks. Get caught and their medical careers were finished. Presumably you were worth it.
    I don't think they were taking huge risks. It wasn't on a ward with dying people in the next bed/ Alternative arrangements were made

    Grey's Anatomy is right (as @BartholomewRoberts suggests). Medics are at it like rabbits. It is surely the proximity to death and disease, thanatos firing up eros
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Insert your own joke about Johnson having a hairdresser:

    I'd be really careful about dropping stuff like that on to PB, unmediated. Potentially, that is grossly libellous
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,109
    NEW from @IpsosUK: Labour lead at 11.

    Lab 41% (+2 from May)
    Con 30% (-3)
    Lib Dems 15% (+3)
    Green 6% (+1)
    Other 8% (-3)

    But the real story is on party image. THREAD

    1/ Cons at all time low on being seen as 'fit to govern'. Labour lead by default. UK politics in a nutshell? https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1542812840360280064/photo/1
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,121
    JohnO said:

    Roger said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Conservative problem here is NOT that they are randier, hornier or pervertier than Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, PC, etc.

    Instead, it's that
    a) there are more of them (that pesky 80-seat majority); and
    b) they are "lead" by pack of incompetents who not only share & are quite unable to curb these vices, but are compelled to publicize them as some freakish form of performance art.

    The Left is also much more prudish and Puritan than it used to be. They are the anti sex league

    So I imagine Labour MPs are self censoring their behaviour, hence getting into less trouble

    Being a bunch of useless boring joyless drones has its advantages
    If only there was a happy medium between being a boring, joylous drone on the one hand, and grabbing at penises in gentlemen's clubs, taking coke in an effort to impress women young enough to be your daughter, or watching pornography in the House of Commons on the other.

    It's such a fine line, isn't it?
    You'll be surprised to hear I'm with the penis-grabbing, coke-snorting, porn-watchers. Well, not the oenis grabbing, but you know what I mean

    I'd rather have my politicians made out of the normal crooked timber of humanity than be Woke Robots, cancelling everyone for having a libido

    From Churchill to Cromwell, JFK to FDR, Lloyd George to d'Annunzio, Martin Luther King to Paddy Ashdown, Alexander the Great to Jo Swinson, great leaders have had terrible human flaws. It's the price we pay
    I know you're being tongue in cheek about it (and we all get a tremendous kick out of you playing the part you do of the devil-may-care lothario who nevertheless has time to spend 23 hours a day posting below the line on a politics forum on t'internet).

    But which of Chris Pincher, David Warburton, and Neil Parish would you classify as "great leaders"? They are all rather inadequate (indeed extremely boring) politicians who are either unable or unwilling to exercise sensible levels of self-control around young men, young women, and tractors respectively.
    You're a very funny poster! One we haven't seen the like of since the great 'Lympe Pole' several years ago (his precise name escapes me).
    Avery...and yes he was very very good.
    But pb's finest was Adrian Harper.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,100
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly

    I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?


    OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
    You're really not getting very much at the moment, are you?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,910

    Bugger, fell into the curse of the new thread. I'd just posted this:

    Just read an interesting thought on Twitter, don't know how realistic a prospect it would be.

    The tweeter's saying that if Starmer were to get the FPN and had to resign - and they suppose the Tories are probably putting the pressure on behind the scenes for one to be issued - then the govt will go for an election whilst Labour are leaderless.

    Machiavellian but I can imagine it happening.

    I think it's utterly unrealistic.

    Firstly, it would be seen to put the Queen in a deeply invidious position as it would be a government with a sizeable majority holding a very early election purely for opportunistic reasons. I think she'd have no choice but to allow it, but it'd be a terrible look.

    Secondly, it would very easily be portrayed as wholly opportunistic, feeding into existing views about Johnson in a negative way.

    Thirdly, Labour would probably very quickly coalesce around a replacement, either in PLP or via NEC rule changes or both, and that individual would be far more likely to get a short term boost in the opinion polls than a knock, and it would be at exactly the right time.

    Overall, it's just daft speculation - it's not just that it might backfire, it's that it would almost certainly backfire, badly. And the PM, for all his flaws, isn't daft in terms of political tactics and would know that perfectly well.
    Interesting, thank you.

    The Queen would have to allow it, but yes I don't think she'd like it one bit.

    It probably is just daft speculation and nothing at all will come of it, but a part of me thinks Johnson is bonkers enough, shameless enough, to go for it, should the opportunity arise.
    If it is seen as more likely to save the mutt's nuts than any other option, then why not? The issue is what his MPs think and whether they would be willing and able to decapitate their own party, especially after it was committed to an election. I've been wondering that for weeks (and said so on PB). The further problem is that HM is in a zugzwang in such an extrem situation - whatever she does she is interfering in politics.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 11,225
    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly

    I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?


    OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
    I suppose the opportunites for sex at work would be fairly limited for flintknappers, so it's gratifying to learn you were able to play successfully away from home a few times.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 15,917
    Leon said:

    Insert your own joke about Johnson having a hairdresser:

    I'd be really careful about dropping stuff like that on to PB, unmediated. Potentially, that is grossly libellous
    Would the damages be set by a jury or a judge? If the former, it might be £1.....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,804
    Alistair said:

    @Leon

    Evidence of sinsiter plan beinng enacted by super intelligent AI unwittingly unleashed on the world or self-driving cars being a bit crap? You decide.

    https://twitter.com/urbenschneider/status/1542645823787257856

    Be more concerned when the super AI decides to start mowing people down like a scene out of Westworld.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,529

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I've never had a proper job, but from what I understand sex at work is quite a thrill. There's certainly lots of porn devoted to it, presumably because it takes a boring place where sex is not meant to happen - an office - and makes it happen. It breaks a taboo, excitingly

    I have had sex with girls at their place of work, quite a few times. A doctor in a hospital, a nurse at St Barts, a student actress backstage, a TV presenter in the dressing room, I once got my girlfriend to do her A Level revision topless (true story). Does that count?


    OK, OK, I'll go to the dry cleaners, pfff
    You're really not getting very much at the moment, are you?
    Starvation rations, mate, starvation rations

    But not actually STARVING
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,852
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW from @IpsosUK: Labour lead at 11.

    Lab 41% (+2 from May)
    Con 30% (-3)
    Lib Dems 15% (+3)
    Green 6% (+1)
    Other 8% (-3)

    But the real story is on party image. THREAD

    1/ Cons at all time low on being seen as 'fit to govern'. Labour lead by default. UK politics in a nutshell? https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/1542812840360280064/photo/1

    Pinging @HYUFD to say that Labour would have to be ten points in the lead Labour would have to be fifteen points in the lead, for it to matter.

    Boris should resign. Not because he had sex, but because he's not good enough anymore. 👎
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 21,493

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    FPT and on topic:

    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    There’s something of a double standard here. Would Pincher have kept the whip if he tried to grope two women ?

    That is a very good point. A gay sexual assault is quite as bad as one by a man on a woman.

    Frankly, appointing someone with his record was stupid. And keeping him as a Tory MP despite what he has admitted is even more stupid.

    But this is a government run by a man who had blow jobs in his office from his mistress.

    So the standard of probity expected of Tory MPs seems to be no more than that they should be alive.
    Do you actually care about blow jobs in the office from his mistress?

    The boss by his behaviour sends out the message to everyone below that it's OK to behave just how you like; that's the way that it matters.
    So what?

    I couldn't care less about blow jobs in the office, if the door and window is closed, what consenting adults do between them is none of anybody else's business.

    In the past three decades the best President of the United States of America is infamous for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office. I'd still rather have him at his prime as POTUS now than Biden or even Obama, let alone Dubya or worse.

    Who would you rather have as POTUS - Bill Clinton who had blowjobs from his mistress in the Oval Office, or Dubya Bush whom that has never been alleged against?
    You are rather missing the point.

    I am pointing out that if that is how the PM behaves he is hardly in a good position to demand or expect higher standards for his subordinates.

    Do I care personally? No - in the sense that the PM is a complete stranger so his personal sexual morals do not affect me.

    Do I care that the Foreign Secretary thought it appropriate to have sex in his office with his mistress during work hours? Yes - it is completely unprofessional. Were there any evidence of him being good at his job there would be something weighty to put in the balance. But there wasn't, was there?

    And that complete disregard for rules, standards, for a sense of professionalism, of decorum or dignity was not a one off: it has shown itself time and time again, of which Partygate is the latest example.

    People having affairs happens. Marriages fail. But it is possible to be discreet - and have some respect for the dignity of the office you hold. It is not necessary for Tory party MPs to behave as if they were in a competition to see who most resembles a rutting chimp.

    Leadership is, in part, about setting a good example. That is why Partygate has been so damaging. There is a problem with sexual misconduct among MPs. If this is to be dealt with then we need leaders who do not turn a blind eye to it by appointing to senior positions MPs with a history of such bad behaviour and despite warning about their conduct. Trying to enforce such standards is going to be a good deal more difficult if you yourself behave in an undignified way. The issue is not the PM's unfaithfulness but the fact that he could not see the utter wrongness of having sex with his mistress in the office rather than waiting until they were at home or in a hotel.
    I'm sorry but I totally and utterly disagree. Having consensual sexual relations with another adult is not "sexual misconduct" no matter how "deviant" other people consider that consensual behaviour to be.

    What Pincher, Grady, Hill etc have been alleged to be involved in is non-consensual sexual behaviour.

    The line between consensual and non-consensual behaviour should never be blurred.
    Its sexual misconduct *in public office*. The affair is not the issue - had Johnson been receiving a blowjob from his wife in his FCO office that would also have been sexual misconduct.
    Why?

    If its behind closed doors, then I don't think it is. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is up to them.
    At work? Give over.
    Yes, people have sex at work sometimes. If shows like Grey's Anatomy are to be believed, that's half of what people do.

    If you're doing it in the open, then that would be misconduct. If you're doing it behind closed doors then I don't see any difference between that and playing Candy Crush at work, or writing on obscure political blogs while at work.
    Eugh, the only people who should be having sex at work are sex workers.
    I haven't, but I do know many who have (only consensually) who are not sex workers, and that's just from what people have said. I'm past my days of playing "never have I ever" while drinking anymore, but if you were to ask that with people answering honestly, I think you might be surprised how many people would drink.
    Oh I am sure it happens all the time, it has happened at places I have worked, I just think it is both unprofessional and gross.
    It absolutely does happen at work. Office affairs happen, and people have sex on business trips etc. But in hotels! Again, if you get caught shagging at work you are very very likely to get the sack.

    BR may disagree with this simple business reality but that's as maybe. Had his FCO office been a big city company office, and he gets caught inflagrante there, he'd get the sack. Why should government be any different?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,804
    Another day, another couple of ground breaking AI...

    Minerva - Does your maths homework for you
    https://twitter.com/alewkowycz/status/1542559176483823622?s=20&t=yJ_9fHKwmeGqoCen-nJoWA

    DeepNash, an autonomous agent capable of learning to play the imperfect information game Stratego from scratch, up to a human expert level
    https://twitter.com/ak92501/status/1542715422004346882?s=20&t=yJ_9fHKwmeGqoCen-nJoWA

    Used to love a game of stratego when I was a kid.
This discussion has been closed.