In my last blog I explained why a close friendship with a Corbynista was a friendship for idiots. It generated some very interesting comments. Many of our loyal readers were of the view that this was unreasonable. Obviously, I beg to differ.

In fact the only thing even more idiotic than having a close friendship with a Corbynista is marrying one. So let me save all our single readers a lot of heartache and trouble – when it comes to choosing a spouse, for the love of God, do not marry someone who has diametrically opposed views to your own. And I’ll tell you why.

People often discuss whether a marriage of mixed religious views is a good idea. Personally I don’t think it’s a smart move. If one spouse is very religious, and the other is not, or is of a different religion, you are in for a challenging time. I understand that many, many of these marriages work, so more to power to you, but it is something to which one should give careful consideration.

So to whether a marriage of mixed or opposing political views can ever really work. It is true that not every couple can, or should, agree on everything, but do think deeply about what is really important to you, and what would be the deal-breaker. Do you really want to be married to someone who holds not just different views on this issue, but opposing views?

In my opinion a marriage of very different political views is a marriage made in the divorce courts. How long do you really think a marriage between a Thatcherite conservative and a Corbynista socialist can last?

But, I hear you say, it would be all so hot in the beginning, so forbidden, or in the words of that great philosopher of our time, Ross Geller, so taboooooo.

All the arguing and the make-up sex, followed by even more arguing and make-up sex – you’d never leave the hotel room while on honeymoon.

Sure, perhaps this is the case. At first. But just how long do you think this phase is going to last? A few months, a year, maybe two or even three. And then you are not newlyweds but just a married couple, folding each other’s laundry and arguing over whose turn it is to empty the dishwasher.

Then the kids come along and they poop on you and get sick on you and draw all over your newly painted wall. Reality hits and as you wipe off that crayon for the zillionth time you want to know that this isn’t just about the crayon. This is about your values and your children. This is about passing down your values to those kids who spend some of their time getting sick on you. The point is, through all the drudgery, you want to make sure what those values are, that your spouse shares them and that you are working in tandem with each other to pass them on.

Maybe hubby is at work while you are wiping up the sick, or perhaps it is his turn while you empty the dishwasher; either way as a married couple you are a well-oiled machine, a single unit independent of the State and often disagreeing with whatever crazy scheme the latest Statists have come up with.

The effort of money-making and home-making will be a lot worse once you realise that, in fact, your spouse is working against you because he does not share your values.

I can only imagine how exhausting it is if your other half honestly believes that State ownership of industry is a good thing. And what happens if the culture war comes knocking on your door asking for your kids? Trust me, this can happen and when it does you had better make sure you and your spouse are united on what to do and don’t spend your time and energy arguing about your next move.

So go ahead – date the hot Corbynista if you want to. Just make sure you don’t marry him.


  1. “and therefore [marriage] is not by any to be enterprised, nor taken in hand, unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to satisfy men’s carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God; duly considering the causes for which Matrimony was ordained.”

    “Brute beasts that have no understanding” – this could be our new term for Corbynistas.

    • Bingo! If the sexiest-looking woman in the world started spouting that nonsense my interest would, erm, wane in a moment. Having sex with a victimhood mentality is no fun whatsoever.

      • I think you’re safe considering the gaggle of Corbyn babes that follow him around. Overweight, key jangling, crazy hair coloured, metal embedded face, smelly looking swamp donkeys are not my usual type.
        The right tend to have the hottest female contingent, certainly in the US anyway.

  2. In days or yore families would be involved in the choosing of spouses. If the spouse and their family were of the same values and indeed the same religion the marriage was deemed to have a chance of success.

    We have become ignorant of these sensibilities. The freedoms purportedly given to us to choose our own spouse or partner regardless of whether our family does or does not approve has actually created a lot of tension within the family unit. It has created division and breakdown with family support and family history. The divorce rate is shockingly high. Childbirth outside of marriage is high. The state interferes and makes matters worse.

    How much better it would be for people to realise that marriage truly is a serious business that protects the children. Moreover it would be so much more sensible if marriage, parenthood and family were given the support and priority missing in all government agenda today.

    • How right you are! I despair. When will people ‘get it’ that marriage is for children (as well as for love and romance) for their identity and security in the knowledge of who is responsible for them – including a wider kin network tied in by marriage.

      • Interesting timing since I’m just back from my last sibling’s funeral (brother in law, actually). I recall that my younger sister (both were considerably older than I am) got married, my father refused to give her away, some of it may have been due to his being Catholic, but I suspect it was more a judgement on his character. Once she did so anyway, dad accepted him unreservedly into the family, but when he proved to be an abusive drunk, his support for her during and after the divorce was total, and I also note that he was happy to walk her down the aisle when she remarried, this time to a very good man she had dated in high school. The point, sometimes our parents are wiser than we are, but they should support our decisions even when we are wrong.

  3. I am a Roman Catholic. My wife (yes, she is a woman!. How very unfashionable) of 36 years is a Methodist but confirmed in C of E. We married in the C of E. Vows you know. We kept them. Terribly unfashionable but I have always been an iconoclast deep down.

    • My daughter is of no particular religion. My son in law is Irish non practising catholic. It caused huge family splits on our Irish side when they decided not to marry in the local Catholic Church. My daughter would not be confirmed and her husband to be stood by her. They no longer visit Ireland or the Irish family. It is such a terrible shame.

      The biggest issue was their choice to marry in a registry office in England. Their children will now suffer not having the contact of a set of grandparents who would, I am sure, have been loving and adoring.

      • That is a terrible, terrible shame. I had problems with the local catholic dean regarding the marriage ceremony. It took perhaps a nanosecond to tell him to shove it. According to him we would not be married in the eyes of God. Curiously it was a religious service and I made my vows to God and man, as you do. Being not really married to my wife gives me such a thrill. My parents, both Catholics of course, were totally cool about it. I am sorry to read that your Irish family were not.

      • Mojo, I am surprised by this. Maybe this was back in the bad old days, but you do not have to be a Catholic to marry a Catholic in a Catholic church. You can have a non-believer marry a Catholic in CC, as long as they promise to raise any children in the faith. Maybe that was what your daughter did want to agree with. I suspect if the son-in-law was non practising, it was his family who really could not handle this reality, and things unravelled. No point in getting married in the church just to please the family, if NEITHER spouse really wants it.

        • Laura I actually do not think it was about marrying in a church. I think it has everything to do with his mother not being able to handle her son leaving the village and dropping his faith. She was always living in hope he would return and marry within the village as his twin brother did.

          What made the situation worse was his choice of an English girl without any faith and the realisation that he would probably not return to Ireland.

          I was trying to make the point that sometimes the sensibilities of family values and the truly serious commitment of marriage gets overlooked in today’s world. My husband and I often wonder if it might have been a better solution for the family to sit down and get to know each other. Things may well have been different. We love our son in law very much. He is perfect for our daughter and they are wonderful, loving parents to their children.

      • So ‘loving and adoring’ that they turned their back on their own son because he got married in a registry office?

        • You have a good point. And it has been much discussed between my husband and myself. We thought once the children came along attitudes would soften. They haven’t:(:(:(:(

          • Very sad, especially for the grandchildren who will struggle to understand and may even feel they are to blame. Best wishes to them and the rest of your family.

      • It would appear that the two main people in this sad story are on the same page and it’s the onlookers who are divided . Perhaps the grandparents could still be loving and adoring if they gave up their opposition to what seems to be a happy marriage .

    • How do you mean? (I think I might end up agreeing with you).

      I think this blog is getting a preoccupation with Corbyn supporters just of late. When really a conservative blog should be concerned as to why it has no party representing it and why conservatism doesn’t have its own Corbyn.

  4. So is Clement Attlee’s marriage evidence that you are not entirely correct? People marry for all sorts of reasons based on many shared values and interests, not all of them political.

    • The Attlee’s marriage was probably based on several things but certainly tolerance was one of them . It’s fair to say that tolerance is not a commonly observed characteristic of your bog standard Corbynista , Therefore I would tend to agree with young Laura !

    • Yes, someone mentioned this in the last blog, to which I said – wait until you see my last blog. I could not believe it. The mind boggles. Maybe opposites really do attract…

  5. I’ve been married to two Catholic women (not at the same time) and had a Jewish girlfriend who didn’t hesitate to test my gaskets by saying “I just wish we could have Bill Clinton back.” I can’t remember having a relationship where either politics or religion mattered. There was too many other things to fight about.

  6. Totally agree with your article Laura. I had a shortlived, very passionate but very fiery relationship with a corbynista last year. I met this, outwardly very attractive lady on an expensive dating site for professional people.

    She was a highly paid, highflyer in the public sector. She looked smart, attractive and in great shape physically. She was intelligent, educated and well-spoken……in fact just the sort of woman that you would be delighted to introduce to family and friends.

    It was a passionate, whirlwind romance for the first couple of months……until the start of 2016, when the EU referendum campaign began! We had never really discussed politics prior to that, as our times together had just been jokes, laughs and smalltalk…..and of course…we could barely keep our hands off each other!

    When I first told her that I would be leafleting for the “Leave” campaign, she looked horrified and said that she couldn’t believe that she was dating a “racist”, “xenophobic little englander”!! She told me that she had previously thought me to be intelligent, but now it was clear that I was not!!

    She also told me that she had recently joined the Labour Party, following the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader, and described Jez as “the most courageous man in British politics” …..and a “role model for our children, and all young people everywhere”!!

    To cut a long story short, we argued most days over the following weeks, until I called time on the relationship. All of the petty political arguments had become exhausting, our sex life had all but ceased to exist, and I just couldn’t possibly see a future for us together!

    We lasted four months.

    A sorry, but important lesson learned!

    • princeofnumbers
      Had to laugh when I read this. 4 months – it was fun while it lasted. Wait if it was 4 years. or you had married her?
      Although I must say I don’t know anyone could avoid politics for the first few months. I’d manage about 4 minutes.

      We could have a very long conversation on what makes a really good match.
      If she was a ‘highly paid, highflyer in the public sector.’ then you should assume early on she may not (and I am guessing her but an educated guess) want more than one child, and she definitely will not want to stay at home for that long caring for it.
      That’s her choice, but I suspect if you are hanging around this website, you might want more than 1 child and not necessarily 2 high-pressured careers.

      I get that in this era of obesity that is a shortage of physically attractive, beautiful women. but did she actually care for you? Did you have anything in common? Sure, these days this person, is the person, ‘you would be delighted to introduce to family and friends.’
      But would you have both built a happy family of your own together?

      You should think about what you want and where you want to be in 5 years time. Having someone totally financially dependent on you from the very beginning is a bad move, but the opposite to that might not be great either.

      Keep us updated!

  7. I’m pretty sure that most ‘Corbynistas’ would rather nail their knackers to a railway line and wait for a slow moving freight train, than date someone with the author’s political views. So this pretty much works all round. Top notch article.

    • Oh, you’d be surprised. Don’t forget their self-hatred and masochism. Dating me would be a form of that, only I’m married. To a like minded hubby, obviously.
      Have a kind of Corbyn fan on twitter.

  8. Typical female entitlement, sleep around when you are young and then, when the wall approaches settle for a beta male to pay the bills.

    No thanks, someone elses sloppy seconds is not attractive.

    And this ‘conservative’ wonders why marriage is on the way out.


Comments are closed.