Orgasminator
he said he's not gay........he isnt, he likes women too. that makes him bi in my books.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
simon hughes didnt lie......
Sex God
Who? 
Sex God
Quote by hisandhers
Who?
ditto
ops: Orgasminator
the liberal democrat mp the press is trying to hound out of a job.
I really don't see the presses problem with this as he his a single guy and is not in a straight relationship with anyone so there is no slur against him as I know of. The guy is a politition and that just makes him easy prey for the press. As most of us know there are plenty more mp's who have a lot to be ashamed of but in my (humble) opinion simon hughes has not commited any wrong. Its just another example of how the nations media control the minds of less liberal thinking people 
Orgasminator
totally agree mik, im not a liberal democrat but i know bullshit when i hear it/see it on tv.
Sex God
The media say he's lied, but I agree with easyease, he just refused to say yes when asked if he was gay, preferring to keep his life private. And if the only thing the TV can bring against him is from 23 years ago(when he apparently used the slogan "the straight choice" when standing against Peter Tatchell in the Bermondsey by-election) then their argument is pretty thin.
Orgasminator
the medias controlled by freemasons.......
Master of Sex
Made me laff when the media reported it as him having "homosexual" and "heterosexual" relationships.....oh labels - don't ya just love em?
Orgasminator
same here mr dicrete....... its a shame the media dont consider bisexuality to be an option.....
Sex God
It's all hypocritical pish!!!!
I have spent the day shouting at the radio
"THE WORDS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR ARE BI -SEXUAL!!!!!"
What a load of shite! Typical Media!!
What difference does it make to his ability to work.
It's the same as the SHOCK HORROR DOGGING / SWINGERS IN CONSENSUAL SEX type story in todays media.
Roll on the time when the public see it all for what the media are.
Having seen the interviews today tho' I think most people realise that he hasn't exactly cheated on anyone and therefore it aint all that important!!
Good luck to him
I have spent the day shouting at the radio
"THE WORDS YOU ARE LOOKING FOR ARE BI -SEXUAL!!!!!"
What a load of shite! Typical Media!!
What difference does it make to his ability to work.
It's the same as the SHOCK HORROR DOGGING / SWINGERS IN CONSENSUAL SEX type story in todays media.
Roll on the time when the public see it all for what the media are.
Having seen the interviews today tho' I think most people realise that he hasn't exactly cheated on anyone and therefore it aint all that important!!
Good luck to him
Hughes may not have lied but he certainly gained advantage by not being open and honest. He was first elected when standing against Peter Tachell in South London. Tachell was by far the better candidate and would have done far more for the people in the area BUT because he was openly gay, Tachell was hounded by the press and the Lib Dems used his sexuality as an issue. Hughes did nothing to stop this. As a result, IMHO, Tachell lost and Hughes won. After the result was declared Hughes apologised to Tachell for the dirty campaign his party had fought. Tachell says he has forgiven Hughes and is pleased he has 'come out'.
Orgasminator
TBH the lib dems have done themselves no favours by their recent behaviour. First came news of kennedy's problems and his departure. Then oaten and his bit. Now the floo-gates are open they are going to get everything thrown at them.
Personally i agree with a lot of the comments above but at the same time you can understand his decision to lie about his sexual preferences. Although as long as he is not involved in anything illegal, I would base my vote upon policies, political history, public presence etc, that is not the case for a large proportion of the voters in this or any country. I spoke with a colleague about this subject yesterday, while we both agreed that the main issue was the fact he had lied in initial questioning was the main issue, when I offered the opnion that quetsions like that really have no place in politics, what peopel do in there spare tiem is really none of our business ( and that goes as far as teh issues of divorce etc because you can never truely appreciate the situation, and therefore should make no comment or pass no judgement) , my colleague said something that really suprised me "well if he's gay who knows what other deviances he mnay have."
I consider this person to be open minded and accepting but although he has no quarrell with the gay community he still feels that it is some way wrong and that his sexual preference would affect his voting.
When in the media refusing to answer a question is seen as an admission, and when you're overall aim is to become voted prime minister by the Uk's public, I can understand the decision to lie considering the underlying and unspoken homophobia among much of the british population.
It's not right but how would you deal with it?
I consider this person to be open minded and accepting but although he has no quarrell with the gay community he still feels that it is some way wrong and that his sexual preference would affect his voting.
When in the media refusing to answer a question is seen as an admission, and when you're overall aim is to become voted prime minister by the Uk's public, I can understand the decision to lie considering the underlying and unspoken homophobia among much of the british population.
It's not right but how would you deal with it?
Quote by osker99
Personally i agree with a lot of the comments above but at the same time you can understand his decision to lie about his sexual preferences. Although as long as he is not involved in anything illegal, I would base my vote upon policies, political history, public presence etc, that is not the case for a large proportion of the voters in this or any country. I spoke with a colleague about this subject yesterday, while we both agreed that the main issue was the fact he had lied in initial questioning was the main issue, when I offered the opnion that quetsions like that really have no place in politics, what peopel do in there spare tiem is really none of our business ( and that goes as far as teh issues of divorce etc because you can never truely appreciate the situation, and therefore should make no comment or pass no judgement) , my colleague said something that really suprised me "well if he's gay who knows what other deviances he mnay have."
I consider this person to be open minded and accepting but although he has no quarrell with the gay community he still feels that it is some way wrong and that his sexual preference would affect his voting.
When in the media refusing to answer a question is seen as an admission, and when you're overall aim is to become voted prime minister by the Uk's public, I can understand the decision to lie considering the underlying and unspoken homophobia among much of the british population.
It's not right but how would you deal with it?
I think that you took the words out my mouth...I think that you have to read between the lines and understand that other MP's have been ousted and in some cases taken to court for perjury for all sorts of reason namely though for not admitting to accepting gifts, sleeping with prostitutes etc. The guy "lied" in a time when those who represent the public are meant to set an example. It's a shame that Tony Blair doesn't get the same treatment over the Iraq war....An illegal war that is costing innocent lives more so than under Saddam if the situation continues with the current casualties.
I take my hat off to Paddy Ashdown for coming out an admiting to having an affair with his secretary. If I remember correctly he wasn't too damaged by it all. But I stand to be corrected on that one.
As for Labour well....it's LIES LIES LIES.... If here were in the Labour Party he would get a chance to make a come back as Secretary to Northern Ireland...once the dust is cleared...I am sure the Labour propaganda machine thinks that most of us suffer from amnesia..
Quote by osker99
Personally i agree with a lot of the comments above but at the same time you can understand his decision to lie about his sexual preferences. Although as long as he is not involved in anything illegal, I would base my vote upon policies, political history, public presence etc, that is not the case for a large proportion of the voters in this or any country. I spoke with a colleague about this subject yesterday, while we both agreed that the main issue was the fact he had lied in initial questioning was the main issue, when I offered the opnion that quetsions like that really have no place in politics, what peopel do in there spare tiem is really none of our business ( and that goes as far as teh issues of divorce etc because you can never truely appreciate the situation, and therefore should make no comment or pass no judgement) , my colleague said something that really suprised me "well if he's gay who knows what other deviances he mnay have."
I consider this person to be open minded and accepting but although he has no quarrell with the gay community he still feels that it is some way wrong and that his sexual preference would affect his voting.
When in the media refusing to answer a question is seen as an admission, and when you're overall aim is to become voted prime minister by the Uk's public, I can understand the decision to lie considering the underlying and unspoken homophobia among much of the british population.
It's not right but how would you deal with it?
Quote by osker99
Personally i agree with a lot of the comments above but at the same time you can understand his decision to lie about his sexual preferences. Although as long as he is not involved in anything illegal, I would base my vote upon policies, political history, public presence etc, that is not the case for a large proportion of the voters in this or any country. I spoke with a colleague about this subject yesterday, while we both agreed that the main issue was the fact he had lied in initial questioning was the main issue, when I offered the opnion that quetsions like that really have no place in politics, what peopel do in there spare tiem is really none of our business ( and that goes as far as teh issues of divorce etc because you can never truely appreciate the situation, and therefore should make no comment or pass no judgement) , my colleague said something that really suprised me "well if he's gay who knows what other deviances he mnay have."
I consider this person to be open minded and accepting but although he has no quarrell with the gay community he still feels that it is some way wrong and that his sexual preference would affect his voting.
When in the media refusing to answer a question is seen as an admission, and when you're overall aim is to become voted prime minister by the Uk's public, I can understand the decision to lie considering the underlying and unspoken homophobia among much of the british population.
It's not right but how would you deal with it?
I agree that it's not relevant but with the crass media that exists in this country, it is inevitable! So to answer how would I deal with it? As a person who hopes to win leadership of a party and has desires to run a country, I'd be a damned sight more media savvy or get myself advisors who were and plan the best way to deal with it in advance.
I'd probably have my advisors leak the story over a period of time so that by the time I was asked about it directly, the truth would have lost its shock impact anyway
Hope for the best, plan for the worst! Sounds like a motto for any politician
It matters not 2 jots what the SH feelings about an PM's sexuality are or how open we are to accepting variation in sexuality. The media use vanilla social norms as the standard to measure against.
I situations such as a male PM being caught out sucking another man's cock, the media apply the closed-minded hetro norm and make a headline...
the closed-minded hetro public cry "oh, how horrid"...
the PM's party reacts...
the media report on the party's reaction...
the closed-minded public are reasured that their dismay was justifed (or why else would the party react in such a way) whilst others now fear the values of the closed-minded as the level of unacceptance has been amplified by the media and reactions of the party.
The PM's party should just say "yes he likes a bit of cock, but not in office hours - in that time he is bloody good at his job"
I situations such as a male PM being caught out sucking another man's cock, the media apply the closed-minded hetro norm and make a headline...
the closed-minded hetro public cry "oh, how horrid"...
the PM's party reacts...
the media report on the party's reaction...
the closed-minded public are reasured that their dismay was justifed (or why else would the party react in such a way) whilst others now fear the values of the closed-minded as the level of unacceptance has been amplified by the media and reactions of the party.
The PM's party should just say "yes he likes a bit of cock, but not in office hours - in that time he is bloody good at his job"
Quote by TomCat999
Hughes may not have lied but he certainly gained advantage by not being open and honest. He was first elected when standing against Peter Tachell in South London. Tachell was by far the better candidate and would have done far more for the people in the area BUT because he was openly gay, Tachell was hounded by the press and the Lib Dems used his sexuality as an issue. Hughes did nothing to stop this. As a result, IMHO, Tachell lost and Hughes won. After the result was declared Hughes apologised to Tachell for the dirty campaign his party had fought. Tachell says he has forgiven Hughes and is pleased he has 'come out'.
As someone who lived in the area at the time I just like to add that Tatchell was not the best candidate in the election. I can't say I agreed with his politics but as a local constituancy MP Simon Hughes was very dedicated. At the time the Bermonsey seat was probably one of, if not the safest Labour seats in the UK, the then Militant local labour party thought that they could put a monkey on the ballot paper and walk it. Admittedly the media had a field day with Tatchell and Hughes wasn't exactly wading in to help him, something he should have apologised for years ago. That said, in the end although a dirty campaign was run, the best man for the job won.
Harry
Quote by onemanandhisfrog
The problem hear isnt that he is Bisexual or gay
To the people on here it may not be - but the subject of the lie/deception/hypocricy is just as (if not more) important when it comes to the media and public reaction.
Would it be a headline if he lied about how much he spends on his shopping?
Would it be a headline if 20+ years ago he lead a campaign to recyle waste and they had found a baked bean tin in his wheelie-bin?
Quote by easyease
the medias controlled by freemasons.......
If it was........ it would be better !
Do you know what the freemasons do ? Do you have any idea how much money they raise and give to charity?
Do you have the slightest knowledge about what they are about ............. or do you just believe the rubbish printed n the press ?
Getting back to the point .......... People are people and that includes all the MP's. It shouldnt make the slightest difference if the guy is Str8 gay or bi. The issue was that he lied ! and a liar is a liar.......... nothing to do with sexual preference !
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Well said Blonde,
The freemasons do endless work for Charity, all this Bullsh1t you hear about secret society and devil worship, nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been to many freemason occasions for Charity and these people could not do enough. they do great work and have a piss up at the same time
The freemasons do endless work for Charity, all this Bullsh1t you hear about secret society and devil worship, nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been to many freemason occasions for Charity and these people could not do enough. they do great work and have a piss up at the same time
