Scrutable

lpm wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 6:59 pm From what he said, the "power" hypothesis doesn't seem valid. He wasn't more powerful than neighbouring MPs and it doesn't sound like bullying actions.

Fits better with the casual attitude to p.rnography in our society. This thread is further evidence, repeatedly reverting to joking about the funny aspects and avoiding consideration of the harassing aspects. To be fair, the tractor excuse is pretty hilarious.

Also, the ratio of watching to getting caught mustn't be ignored. No way does anyone watch p.rnography twice and get noticed twice by two people prepared to publicly complain. Worst luck ever, if true. The ratio would be more like watch in public 40 times, get noticed 4 times, get complained about 2 times? He's clearly a repeat offender and no doubt more claims will emerge.

bjn wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:35 pm While the p.rn in parliament thing is despicable and wrong, isn’t it a dead cat on the table to distract from various other f.ckups? Like Michelle Moan and the Government being held responsible for killing thousands of people in care homes.

Grumble wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:52 pm

bjn wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:35 pm While the p.rn in parliament thing is despicable and wrong, isn’t it a dead cat on the table to distract from various other f.ckups? Like Michelle Moan and the Government being held responsible for killing thousands of people in care homes.

I don’t think so. It adds to the sleazy impression we have of the Tories, it doesn’t take attention away from them.

Tessa K wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:54 pm

Grumble wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:52 pm

bjn wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:35 pm While the p.rn in parliament thing is despicable and wrong, isn’t it a dead cat on the table to distract from various other f.ckups? Like Michelle Moan and the Government being held responsible for killing thousands of people in care homes.

I don’t think so. It adds to the sleazy impression we have of the Tories, it doesn’t take attention away from them.

But what are we talking more about, tractors or care homes?

Grumble wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:56 pm

Tessa K wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:54 pm

Grumble wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:52 pm

I don’t think so. It adds to the sleazy impression we have of the Tories, it doesn’t take attention away from them.

But what are we talking more about, tractors or care homes?

We’re talking about votes. At least if we’re discussing dead cats we are.

bjn wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 10:45 pm

Grumble wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:56 pm

Tessa K wrote: Sat Apr 30, 2022 8:54 pm

But what are we talking more about, tractors or care homes?

We’re talking about votes. At least if we’re discussing dead cats we are.

A p.rn obsessed MP, while it adds to the general sleaze, can be written off and forgotten once he’s resigned and opprobrium heaped upon him personally. While that opprobrium heaps up it crowds out the thousands of dead illegally killed by the Tories. With any luck that, and a few other dead cats, will keep the country distracted from a far more serious and damaging crime until it’s fades into the past.

Fishnut wrote: Sun May 01, 2022 5:34 am I find it interesting that so many people here are dismissing this as a distraction or a minor story of limited significance. Iirc this came out shortly after statistics that found a horrifyingly large number of male MPs have been accused of sexual misconduct against their female colleagues.

That should be cause for outrage, but beyond this specific MP the news seems to have come and gone. Maybe he is a sacrificial lamb, designed to take the focus of the broader issues, but I wonder if the incidents were made public in the hopes of making it clear how endemic these problems are, and what they say about the people running our country. Instead it seems the vast majority of people have turned into adolescent boys and are just sniggering about it. Which speaks volumes.

Instead of paying attention to his job, while in the House of Commons and in a committee meeting, an MP decided not to browse Twitter or Reddit, or check their emails or visit any of a number of innocuous sites, he decided to visit a p.rn site. As lpm points out, it's highly unlikely this is something he's only done twice and been 'unlucky' enough to be caught both times. As with sexual harassment and sexual assaults more generally, it's far more likely that the incidents reported are but the tip of the iceberg.

I get the sense that people see this as part of the political soap opera and not really important compared to corruption and unlawful actions of the government. I disagree. This is a parliament that votes on regularly votes on women's issues, often voting against bills aimed at improving our lives (particularly those women most in need of help, such as those experiencing domestic violence). This is a parliament who represents women, yet sees us as professionally and personally inferior, who at best can be ignored and at worse abused. Is it any wonder that so many of our institutions have problems with women when those in power, who have the ability to create legislation to force them to do better, act like this?

This isn't a distraction, this isn't part of the soap opera that is modern politics. This is a serious issue that speaks volumes about how those in charge of our country view and treat half the population. The fact that so many see it as a joke or a non-issue simply shows why it it was able to get this bad and just how much work will be required to improve things.

Fishnut wrote: Sun May 01, 2022 5:34 am I find it interesting that so many people here are dismissing this as a distraction or a minor story of limited significance. Iirc this came out shortly after statistics that found a horrifyingly large number of male MPs have been accused of sexual misconduct against their female colleagues.

That should be cause for outrage, but beyond this specific MP the news seems to have come and gone. Maybe he is a sacrificial lamb, designed to take the focus of the broader issues, but I wonder if the incidents were made public in the hopes of making it clear how endemic these problems are, and what they say about the people running our country. Instead it seems the vast majority of people have turned into adolescent boys and are just sniggering about it. Which speaks volumes.

Instead of paying attention to his job, while in the House of Commons and in a committee meeting, an MP decided not to browse Twitter or Reddit, or check their emails or visit any of a number of innocuous sites, he decided to visit a p.rn site. As lpm points out, it's highly unlikely this is something he's only done twice and been 'unlucky' enough to be caught both times. As with sexual harassment and sexual assaults more generally, it's far more likely that the incidents reported are but the tip of the iceberg.

I get the sense that people see this as part of the political soap opera and not really important compared to corruption and unlawful actions of the government. I disagree. This is a parliament that votes on regularly votes on women's issues, often voting against bills aimed at improving our lives (particularly those women most in need of help, such as those experiencing domestic violence). This is a parliament who represents women, yet sees us as professionally and personally inferior, who at best can be ignored and at worse abused. Is it any wonder that so many of our institutions have problems with women when those in power, who have the ability to create legislation to force them to do better, act like this?

This isn't a distraction, this isn't part of the soap opera that is modern politics. This is a serious issue that speaks volumes about how those in charge of our country view and treat half the population. The fact that so many see it as a joke or a non-issue simply shows why it it was able to get this bad and just how much work will be required to improve things.

Stephanie wrote: Tue May 03, 2022 10:12 am

Fishnut wrote: Sun May 01, 2022 5:34 am I find it interesting that so many people here are dismissing this as a distraction or a minor story of limited significance. Iirc this came out shortly after statistics that found a horrifyingly large number of male MPs have been accused of sexual misconduct against their female colleagues.

That should be cause for outrage, but beyond this specific MP the news seems to have come and gone. Maybe he is a sacrificial lamb, designed to take the focus of the broader issues, but I wonder if the incidents were made public in the hopes of making it clear how endemic these problems are, and what they say about the people running our country. Instead it seems the vast majority of people have turned into adolescent boys and are just sniggering about it. Which speaks volumes.

Instead of paying attention to his job, while in the House of Commons and in a committee meeting, an MP decided not to browse Twitter or Reddit, or check their emails or visit any of a number of innocuous sites, he decided to visit a p.rn site. As lpm points out, it's highly unlikely this is something he's only done twice and been 'unlucky' enough to be caught both times. As with sexual harassment and sexual assaults more generally, it's far more likely that the incidents reported are but the tip of the iceberg.

I get the sense that people see this as part of the political soap opera and not really important compared to corruption and unlawful actions of the government. I disagree. This is a parliament that votes on regularly votes on women's issues, often voting against bills aimed at improving our lives (particularly those women most in need of help, such as those experiencing domestic violence). This is a parliament who represents women, yet sees us as professionally and personally inferior, who at best can be ignored and at worse abused. Is it any wonder that so many of our institutions have problems with women when those in power, who have the ability to create legislation to force them to do better, act like this?

This isn't a distraction, this isn't part of the soap opera that is modern politics. This is a serious issue that speaks volumes about how those in charge of our country view and treat half the population. The fact that so many see it as a joke or a non-issue simply shows why it it was able to get this bad and just how much work will be required to improve things.

I think part of the problem now is the obsession with dead cats, and how we should all be concentrating on some other more important story, when the truth is the Tories are sh.t in a lot of areas

‘Sue always says I’m oversexed,’ he says. ‘I don’t know if I am but I have a healthy appetite. She used to say when I was a little too amorous, “I’ll get the scissors to you if you don’t behave yourself. Snippety, snip.” ’
‘Burdizzos,’ Sue corrects him. ‘In the past, I’ve chased him round the kitchen with burdizzos — the things you use on cattle to crush their balls.’

‘There was a direct link [to the site]. I’m not going to say what I Googled but it’s not The Dominator as has been reported, because that’s a combine harvester

Sue, 66, rallies to his defence. ‘I guess we’re not very good at IT, either of us,’ she says. ‘We’ve just booked a holiday. Neil wanted to go from Dover to Dunkirk. It ended up being Dover to Calais. It’s only down the road so it doesn’t matter but we aren’t very good on computers at all.’

Bird on a Fire wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2022 11:59 pm Amazeballs interview with Parrish and his wife in the Heil. Safe link: https://archive.ph/a5Mqr

Highlights include:

‘Sue always says I’m oversexed,’ he says. ‘I don’t know if I am but I have a healthy appetite. She used to say when I was a little too amorous, “I’ll get the scissors to you if you don’t behave yourself. Snippety, snip.” ’
‘Burdizzos,’ Sue corrects him. ‘In the past, I’ve chased him round the kitchen with burdizzos — the things you use on cattle to crush their balls.’

‘There was a direct link [to the site]. I’m not going to say what I Googled but it’s not The Dominator as has been reported, because that’s a combine harvester

Sue, 66, rallies to his defence. ‘I guess we’re not very good at IT, either of us,’ she says. ‘We’ve just booked a holiday. Neil wanted to go from Dover to Dunkirk. It ended up being Dover to Calais. It’s only down the road so it doesn’t matter but we aren’t very good on computers at all.’

Much, much more (than you can stomach, quite possibly) at link.

Former MP Neil Parish, pictured, was searching for tractors on the internet when he came across p.rnography

Bird on a Fire wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2022 11:59 pm

Sue, 66, rallies to his defence. ‘I guess we’re not very good at IT, either of us,’ she says. ‘We’ve just booked a holiday. Neil wanted to go from Dover to Dunkirk. It ended up being Dover to Calais. It’s only down the road so it doesn’t matter but we aren’t very good on computers at all.’