Mp Says He May Have Opened Porn By Mistake....

[Hymie]

And then realised it, after watching for 6 minutes.

[Sqad]

A-H

////It speaks to his complete absence of judgement, to say nothing of self-awareness, to think even for a moment that his behaviour is acceptable.////

I disagree, you seem to have defined for me a normal human trait which we all have in varying degrees.

[Ken4155]

Adult men watch porn













Whenever i've watched porn, there's been, erm, an end product. (Yeah i know, too much info). What was this chap gonna do, whip it out and bash it in view of all in the HoP?

[Ken4155]

My self edit didn't go according to plan, did it. "Adult men watch porn" was meant to have been deleted:-(

[douglas9401]

Some might say that he's paid John Deerely for his tractor fix.

[Peter Pedant]

ken you dirty boy

it is a bit like having sex in public - well what is wrong with that, men and women have sex. yeah but the public bit...

and yes somethings that are lawful are still unacceptable depending on the circumstances

doctors having sex with the patients springs to mind
prime ministers breaking the law is another (but that is contentious with some of the finkers on AB)

[Peter Pedant]

slipping onto the site is a possibility
but - - he did it twice.... careless ( thx to Lady Bracknell)

all the early child porn cases had to be reversed ( operation ore / candyman) because the police said ' ya cant slip onto this site ya dirty rotten perv' - - when they knew you could.

[andy-hughes]

Sqad - // A-H

////It speaks to his complete absence of judgement, to say nothing of self-awareness, to think even for a moment that his behaviour is acceptable.////

I disagree, you seem to have defined for me a normal human trait which we all have in varying degrees. //

I know that long experience shows that you and I are probably going to disagree on this, which is fine, but i think it worth restating my view, and the reasons behind it.

First of all, I entirely agree that this is a normal human trait, no argument there.

Where we part company is my view that it is not the trait that is the issue, it's the time and place where this trait was indulged, and what i believe to be the unacceptable lack of self-awareness and judgement that caused its indulgence.

We as a species all share a wide variety of normal human traits, from the amusing, to the fundamental, the majority of the last which we choose not to share with each other.

At one end of the scale, we sneeze, belch, break wind, sing loudly off key, pick our noses, and so on, which are best done out of sight, but not major transgressions if someone else observes.

At the other end of the scale, we urinate, defecate, and masturbate, and those we do in private, with no-one else watching, because these actions are taboo in our society.

Under those same societal rules, we completely accept that men masturbate, and pornography is a sufficiently successful stimulant, that a multi-billion dollar industry exists to satisfy (no pun intended), the world-wide demand for it.

But we also expect that indulgence to be exercised in private - if we didn't there would be porn loops on monitors at every table in every Costa on the planet.

We don't, because accessing pornography in public is still a cultural taboo.

MP's are elected to form the laws of the country, and it is a reasonable expectation that they understand and observe the cultural attitudes of the society they represent.

For an MP not only to appear not to grasp a simple and fundamental cultural taboo, but to indulge in it in the House, demonstrates a serious inability to understand concepts of expected behaviour, and observation of the basic notions of the suitability of time and place for certain behaviours.

The fact that this individual appears unable to grasp those simple and necessary basics of adult behavior required to work in the seat of government, means that he us utterly unfit to hold the office of MP, and needs to resign immediately.

The further fact that he seriously imagined he could carry on being an MP while he was investigated, simply underlines his disassociation with the seriousness of his misjudgement, and deeply flawed personality that makes him unfit for office.

Yes men masturbate, and yes men look at pornography, but it is not acceptable for them to do it in their place of work with other people present, especially if their place of work is the House Of Commons.

Men also urinate, defecate, etc etc., but what would be the reaction to any Honourable Member who did any of those things in the chamber?

You attempt to pass of this behaviour as simply something 'men do' which it is, but time and place are the aspects you choose to ignore.

I do not.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // AH, why are you telling me to read your posts? I’ve read them and I’ve given my own opinion. //

I didn't 'tell you' to read anything - i have no idea if you read my posts or not, I can;t see into your mind.

I pointed out the text of my post to Sqad to save re-typing it all, since my response is the same to you as it was to him.

[jno]

Watching porn is hardly a crime

actually, as has been pointed out on the other side of the House, “If any indecent matter is publicly displayed the person making the display and any person causing or permitting the display to be made shall be guilty of an offence.”

That's the Indecent Displays (Control) Act.

So watching it may not be a crime, but watching it in the workplace where others can see it is.

[DonkeyHoaty]

Maybe he was trying to find an Only Farms account?

[jno]

I'm told he was trying to type "Cornhub" and got it wrong

[Paigntonian]

Pompous prat til the last.
'My reputation the best'.
"I now tell the world".

[tiggerblue10]

Maybe he clicked on the wrong Animal Farm film.

[webbo3]

I wonder what they are all looking at, in the workplace, then again they must be bored listening to

[webbo3]

I wonder what they are all looking at, in the workplace, then again they must be bored listening to John McDonnell
https://ibb.co/pRGxH5H

[aelmpvw]

they're probably all trying to grab a bingo jackpot . . .

[Sqad]

A-H

///and what i believe to be the unacceptable lack of self-awareness and judgement that caused its indulgence.///

Yes I quite agree with you, it is a common disorder from which we all suffer at some time in our lives. Being an M.P is not an immunisation against this problem.

Yes , I agree with you in that we indulge in all those bodily functions in a private and individual private environment...mostly.....but in this case, in which i don't know the exact details, one would hope that one could answer and scrutinise one's mobile in "relative" privacy.

As I have said, I am not privy to the exact details.

However, the frenzy of feeding has now finished, he has lost his job, his family probably and self respect.

Job done.

[andy-hughes]

Sqad - // but in this case, in which i don't know the exact details, one would hope that one could answer and scrutinise one's mobile in "relative" privacy. //

Again, i think I have failed to make my main point clear.

It6's not about 'relative privacy' - it's about not doing something where the faintest possibility of being observed makes it unacceptable behaviour.

If MP's are going to access their phones in the House, and they all do, then there is always the possibility that someone is going to see their screen, albeit not looking specifically.

As I pointed out, the tiered seating system of the House means that anyone behind you can see your phone.

So if you are going to access it, you restrict your access to only things that you do not mind anyone else seeing.

And I am sure you will agree, pornography does not tick that particular box.

He has lost his job, not as you imply, because of a witch hunt that has hounded an innocent man out of his career.

It is because he showed a level of galaxy-sized willingness to ignore simple protocols about public behaviour, and he did it as an elected MP in the House of Commons.

As I have said all along, a man who cannot grasp the fundamentals of proper behaviour to that degree is not fit to serve as an MP.

And that is why he has not resigned, he wanted to stay, he has been forced to step down because his inability to understand the magnitude of his behaviour led to him thinking that he could ride it out and stay in post.

That simply compounds not a lack of judgement and mature thinking, but an absence of them, and that makes him unfit to walk a dog round the block, never mind represent a constituency as an MP.

[Sqad]

A-H

Yes, that is the popular reasoning and outcome of this sad affair to which I understand but do not entirely agree.