If this is the best the papers can dredge up against Conservative and Labour MPs, can I please have a job in Westminster because it looks like one of the safest places to work.

First, we had Mark Garnier MP asking his secretary to purchase a sex toy and calling her ‘sugar t*ts’. Then we heard that one minister had placed his hand on the knee of a female journalist ‘repeatedly’ and allegedly lunged for a kiss at another 29-year-old after a slightly boozy lunch. These claimed grave wrongdoings by Sir Michael Fallon occurred about 15 and 14 years ago respectively. The reporter at whom Sir Michael allegedly lunged, Jane Merrick, herself says ‘as a political journalist, I went out for lunch with MPs as often as three times a week. It was part of the job. But, over the hundreds of these encounters over my 14 years in the lobby, this was the only time an MP crossed the line – and that is why I remember it so vividly.’ So that’s 14 years in the lobby, and she was mistreated in this way once.

Then there was an alleged glancing touch of Kate Maltby’s knee by Damian Green. The Sunday Times revealed that Green also might have had some legal porn on a computer. We know this because a discredited former police officer said he found out about the porn during a dodgy raid staged on Green’s parliamentary office nine years ago, and now the information has been leaked to the paper. This porn is legal. (I’m not saying it is moral.) These are allegations that are strenuously denied by Mr Green.

A complaint has been referred to the police against Tory MP Charlie Elphicke. He has also denied it, we don’t know what it is and neither does he (like a proper witch-hunt). Another Tory MP, Stephen Crabb, is probably dodgy, having admitted saying ‘some pretty outrageous things’ to a young woman.

Two more Tories, Dan Poulter, a former health minister and Dan Kaczynski, were reported to the party’s disciplinary panel over the weekend for alleged behavioural lapses and another, Chris Pincher, has referred himself.

On the Labour side, none of the three allegations that have been made occurred at Westminster and all have been denied, so I am not even going to deal with them.

Listen up, people, and listen good. I do not believe on current evidence that there is systematic sexual abuse or harassment of women in Westminster. There is no cover-up. Damian Green is not Harvey Weinstein. This is a fake sex scandal generated to destabilise this government.

I am not saying that the women are lying. I leave that for the various investigations to figure out. What I am saying is that even if we take all the allegations to be true, their character, their frequency, their historic nature point to individual acts of wrongdoing, not a culture of harassment or systematic sex abuse. There is a big difference between the two.

We have been blind-sided by the sex, although there is hardly any sex in this scandal. What we are being manipulated into thinking is that MPs have been involved in some huge boiler room fraud when in fact a few may have nicked a stapler. Most of these incidents could be resolved by a personal, civilised apology to the wronged person, and to one’s spouse. That’s it.

Westminster can have a sex Tsar if it wants. Jess Phillips MP has tweeted that the Women’s Parliamentary Labour Party are pushing for an ‘independent specialist sexual violence abuse adviser to be available so victims can come forward without fear’. Fine, we’ll all be funding this ISSVAA. Set up the female journalist networking support system. Bring the men into line when they step out of line; there is in fact nothing new in women ‘telling men how we expected them to behave’.

The unfairness comes from the mixed messages put out there, as Peter Hitchens explained on Sunday. The injustice is the feminist switch and bait, from all of the sex all of the time, to how dare you touch my knee. No wonder the men are confused.

Anyway, politically what we must not tolerate is a fake news scandal aimed at trying to bring this government down. No website has been more critical of the Conservative party and its policies than The Conservative Woman. But we will not blindly accept witch-hunts and co-operate with media feeding frenzies to destroy a democratically elected government. This isn’t a sex scandal; it’s an attempted coup.

I have no doubt this pumped-up anger over historical complaints of MPs trying it on is fooling very few. The public can see this for what it is – fake outrage to pursue various agendas, the main one of which is to destabilise the government. The public want stability and the government to govern.

Finally, what this demonstrates is the total and utter surrender by Theresa May to the Left and the feminists. Really, she is part of it and is part of the problem. That is why we are where we are.

With female Conservative MPs such as Anna Soubry taking the outrage train daily to every TV studio in town things can only get worse. And the men are left to their mercy after years and years of capitulation. Finally, they will see how the feminists dispense justice. It won’t be pretty.


  1. The Telegraph suggests that Fallon wanted Leadsom sacked and that she used an allegation against him to get him sacked instead. It seems that the Government is quite capable of bringing itself down.

    • Exactly. Just like it does not need the EU or any other howwible howwible bogeyman to damage the UK. Brexit does that splendidly, all by itself.

  2. The Jane Merrick story is typical of the hype, justified or otherwise given to what is mainly a feminist coup as Laura says.
    Jane Merrick is described as a Junior journalist implying she is a spotty teenager with a Biro and notepad when in fact she was 29 when this incident took place and had been working in the HoC for some years ! this is what she describes in the Guardian…

    It was here that Fallon lunged at me. This was not a farewell peck on
    the cheek, but a direct lunge at my lips. When I have previously written
    about this incident (referring to an unnamed MP) I have described it as
    a “kiss” – but a kiss suggests something romantic, consensual. This was
    anything but. I shrank away in horror and ran off to my office in the
    press gallery. I felt humiliated, ashamed.

    was it a kiss or an attempted partly drunken attempt, either way so what the last words are pure hyperbole, it is difficult to beleive that a grown woman working in the HoC would be such a snowflake, a word justified in this case, the Julia Hartley-Brewer approach would have been the way to go.
    Amber Rudds calling the disgusting act worthy of resignation is not in keeping with the low key and cringe worthy response to real sexual abuse in large quantities in several British towns, that, they never wanted in the headlines and it disappeared post haste, funny old world or is it just the people in it.

    • Unfortunately most women in Parliament are there for the wrong reasons. Filling a quota system actually denigrates the job. True equality would allow the best and most capable person to fulfil any given role. All Political parties now choose their candidates from the Westminster bubble instead of allowing the Associations in the constituencies to place their own candidates. The system is corrupt. Probably some of the most corrupt women are in labour. Harriet Harmer springs to mind above all others

      • Agree.
        The system and our disgusting elite are totally corrupt.

        Corbyn will clear out his Blairite wasters.
        May will not clear out her Snowflake Remoaners like Blubbering Soubry.

  3. Laura, you are my hero….apart from Margaret Thatcher, whose birthday I am proud to share. This is indeed a Witch hunt by the feminists to destabilise a government led by a woman. How ironic is that!!!!!

    Women in Parliament were never supportive of Mrs Thatcher. Indeed they were incredibly vicious and yet Mrs Thatcher was a strong patriot who worked tirelessly to give everyone aspiration and a better life.

    I despair of this nasty feminist movement. All the women who call themselves feminists should be ashamed of themselves. They have systematically destroyed everything that is unique, strong and feisty within womanhood. They should be showing their outrage about Rotherham, FGM, the burka, the s3xua.isation of society. It no ….. all they do is show their dislike of men and their contempt of real women.

    • What is laughable are the claims by some feminists that this spate of muck-raking will usher in some kind of new age in sexual relationships, with everyone behaving impeccably – if only out of fear of bad behaviour being exposed and punished. “Impeccably” also of course being defined by these self-appointed arbiters and guardians of public morality.

      But it will do nothing of the sort. Bullying will continue, as it always does, no matter how often perpetrators are called out or rooted out. There will shortly be another Weinstein, if there is not one already in action who has just not been exposed yet. Bullying is just a pejorative term for the very normal and natural process by which the strong assert themselves over the weak. If the weak find a way to band together and overcome the strong, then that does not end the practice. It just changes the personnel, and the bullying continues with the roles reversed.

      This is exactly what would happen if the proposed ISSVAA ever got off the ground. It would be dominated by vicious feminists who would seek to justify their existence by finding all manner of ways to condemn and punish any man who even looked the wrong way at a woman. The bullies would still be in charge, but just following a different agenda with a different range of victims.

      • I totally agree. In fact we are already seeing this in action today. Academia is full of the wrong people, most of whom do not have the strength of character to stand tall and pave the way for stronger women. The strong women are also villified by these feminist groups. It isn’t just the men. It is effectively mob rule and it is being encouraged by the a social ideology that says everyone is the same. Of course they are not, so these people must dumb everything down to suit their belief. However, where again you are correct, the intelligent, independent thinkers say no. They go off an create their own lifestyles. They do not get involved in the mediocrity being played out. Subsequently it creates an establishment of mediocrity. Just look at the Labour Party and the LibDems. You really cannot say they have anyone of true integrity or ability. Gisela Stuart has gone. Kate Hooey will probably fight on for a little longer, but the rest have bought into mob rule.

        The Conservatives are no better. There isn’t one Conservative woman I would wish to represent me as a woman. This mediocrity is the product of a mediocre education system. Conversely, I believe we are now coming to realise that the electorate are probably more intelligent than the establishment. We do not want more laws and diktats telling us how to behave. We know how to behave. What we need are more role models with integrity within our institutions. People who understand right and wrong and moral hygiene. Not puritanical, but respectful of those we live and work with. There will always be juicy scandals but the reality is they are few and far between.

        If we could just clean up this s#xualisation of society and discourage young people from the free love and entitlement culture we would go a long way to knocking feminism on its head. I now sound like Mary Whitehouse….oh the irony of that

  4. Please cut the conspiracy theories and put them on a flat-earth site. There is a reason Jacob Rees Mogg is not up to his neck in scandal and that is because, whether you agree with all his political views or not, he has always behaved impeccably with decency and respect towards other people, male and female.

    If other politicians had followed his behaviour as a role model, there would be nothing for anybody to stamp their feet about.

    • Exactly. Its that old ‘everyone else does it’ excuse. It will expose the weak minded who have been attracted to a lazy, anything goes lifestyle along with any serious offenders.

  5. “see how the feminists dispense justice”

    “justice” was never a concern of theirs, I don’t call it a ‘witch hunt’ what I do call it is “witches on the hunt”

    If it be called “Society”…………..’Sorority’? then it’s not the sort society I, my family nor indeed all of my friends and acquaintances wish to be part of. Deranged just doesn’t quite do it “justice” – does it?

    • Not just in the Commons air.
      Think of the Wayne Kerrs and Oona Nissts on universersity campuses – and I don’t just mean undergraduates.
      Then of course we have the nice people in the MSM, especially the millionaire gargoyles fronting TV programmes.

  6. Only one thing could unite so many odious people, and the media – the wretched EU. the plan is clearly the give may and excuse to abandon ship, call an election, let Corbyn walk in and cancel Brexit.

    • Did you make that conspiracy all up by yourself? It’s so good, you should get it patented. Along with your very special tin foil hat.

      • The fact that many in the Tory party would gladly like to pass Brexit responsibilities to Labour is hardly a conspiracy. And its fair to say that Theresa is one of them.

        Both main parties would like a situation whereby Brexit is cancelled but the other side get the blame.

  7. Yes, an excellent article. It is an attempted coup. But consider two points. First, the response of several MPs is one of meekness, indeed cowardice, before the media. Why not stand up to the media and tell them where to go? The MPs are an easy target because they have revealed their weakness on so many issues, from confronting Islam to a failure to insist on the protection of our borders. Second, perhaps if a coup forced the spineless MP’s out, they will be replaced with others who will have the courage to defend this country, its values, and confront the media..

    • If only. Theyre more likely to be replaced by Corbyn and Co. Maybe thats what it is going to take for the conservative party to rediscover its core values.

  8. Erm.. hang on, we “sexualise” young children and appear to think nothing of it, then get the faux outrage about a wandering hand or two.
    Am I missing something?
    Of course, we all know the real ideas behind all this, but Laura and other posters can most likely explain it better than me.

    • Indeed, first there was “women’s lib”. And then the natural reaction to this, “men’s lib”. But the feminists don’t like that.

      • Try the MSM (TV adverts, teen mags et al) – with money making as key without thinking of its effect on wider society. Schools thinking it desirable to infuse gender bender propaganda and “relationship education” to small children *(plenty of examples cited in past TCW articles if you care to look).
        As you appear to be “on the troll”, I’m not going to bandy further words with you.

        • Its a sorry state of affairs if asking a question is deemed to be trolling. I have never seen a TV advert which sexualises children and teen mags by definition are not aimed at ‘young children’. With regard to the ‘gender bender’ nonsense this is PC brainwashing and indoctrination targeting children, not the promotion of their sexualisation. You seem to be confusing the two.

          • What it’s got to do with young children should be clear.

            People take their young children to see her concerts, or allow them to go. They buy them her records.

            Did you read it?

          • The first post here was about how we supposedly sexualise young children. I would define this as promoting children below puberty as sexually attractive or available. Our society takes a tough line against this. So hence I asked for examples. Your link is something quite different, it is about a degenerate floozy who is a very poor role model. I suspect most of her fans are teenagers. She epitomises the debased culture of our mass media which in turn reflects the outlook of many in our society. That is the reality and I can see no way of overcoming it without a reintroduction of censorship on this subject which broke down in the 1960s, a return to which would now be enormously unpopular and probably unachievable.

          • I am amazed that you think that allowing children to listen to these words and to sing along to them is not sexualising them.

            That degenerate floozy incidentally is now an “Honorary Citizen of Manchester”. If that’s not promoting her behaviour then what is?

            You are of course entitled to have your own definition of the words. However the original poster clearly intended it to be as I said as he has replied to my posting of that link.

  9. It will have to run its course as part of the inevitable death knell of feminism. Up to this point the feminazi have been having their cake and eating it, but that will now end. This will mean the genuine male predators will no longer be cosseted and that female manipulation for progression will be halted.

    There will be a backlash first, that we need more women everywhere regardless of merit and it will be up to the rest of us to vote at the ballot box and with our wallets only to vote for merit. No more identity politics. The first casualty, the high water mark was the oven mitted, self entitled harpy and crook Clinton.

    There will be casualties along the way who did not deserve losing their careers for very minor dalliances, but that’s just the way of things when the subjectivist fantasy land implodes.

  10. As a distant observer of these events, the most striking feature of this ‘scandal’ is the apparent lack of any scandal. The allegations seem extremely trivial. At worst they are minor disciplinary issues that the feminists seem hell bent on using as a pretext for a purge of male MPs.
    It’s time for men to start voting only for male candidates, only making an exception if a female candidate demonstrates she isn’t a feminist, or a male candidate demonstrates he is a mangina.

    • This is the agenda: a final push for the policing and total corralling and control of male sexuality, the single most energetically constructive force in society, provided it’s properly challenged. Feminists don’t want it channeled, they want it made impotent, literally. It is, therefore, nothing new, just another of their manifold concerted attack on civilisation itself, in an even more than usual hysterical fashion. Civilisation is going down the drainpipes, because they always get want they want. China watches – and waits…

  11. Having long regarded Damian Green as a dripping wet milksop, he is to be applauded for vigorously defending himself and not “stepping aside” at the behest of fifth columnists Heidi Allen and Anna Soubry. If only Green would show the same backbone defending conservative policies and principles as he has done in protecting his political career.

    As Laura rightly says, the actual evidence to date, as distinct from insinuations and sweeping generalisations, simply does not support the current depiction of Westminster as a frat house. Though not always a fan of Edwina Currie, hats off to her for being one of the few women making this point on television last week by combatively talking common sense rather than unsubstantiated hyperbole. On This Week, Edwina’s takedown of Harriet Harman was magnificent, demolishing Hattie’s smug shibboleths – including her astounding assertion that those accusing men of misbehaviour must be allowed to remain anonymous – in a way that no man could presently dare to do.

    It’s telling that when the likes of Harman are pinned down on what they hope to achieve by fomenting this moral panic, they have little to say beyond their predictable sloganeering.

    • “Predictable Sloganeering”.
      The all time classic for me being “Labour – Looking After Women” on her Pink Van Thing.
      Then some wag capped it with: “Like We Did In Rotherham”.

    • Harman is thick. I’ve tried to find some justification for her existence in politics for many many years, and there aren’t any. She’s just thick. As thick as a Toynbee.

  12. Personally I think people like Fallon, or Crabb should remove themselves from public life. They are not fit to serve – as Fallon himself admitted. The allegations regarding Charlie Elphicke (conveniently forgotten above) are in the hands of the police. However, leaving that aside, the real arch nonsense in this article, is that this is a ‘coup’. Who is the mover behind this ‘coup’? No one on the Tory side – and that’s where most of it is coming from – has any vested interest in bringing down Mrs May’s coalition of chaos. Secondly a ‘coup’ suggests some structure, order, purpose. Whereas this is patently just another chapter in the post referendum omnishambles.

    • I agree, Crabb making passes at a woman that had just been for a job interview for him was patently wrong and at best a massive error of judgement.
      As for Fallon, he to would benefit from stepping right back. Am I the only person here who has thought of sympathy for his wife and sons? Apparently his married status is of no relevance in all this?

      • No you are not the only one. I also have thought that these people do not give a fig for the spouse or children. That is what the establishment has come to.

        I also felt the same for Harvey Weinstein’s wife and daughters. Not one woman who came out of the woodwork, in some cases twenty years after the event, gave a thought to his family. What a disgusting group of people the feminists are. They destroyed his wife’s business by sending messages across Media airways naming her as the brains behind Marchessa so do not use this label as a kick in the teeth to Weinstein. She had a business partner who also lost everything. His wife was not to blame and neither were his daughters. In my opinion these women who claim abuse are probably well aware of what they do. They are probably using their feminine wiles to enhance their career. We have all come across men and women whom we have to ‘deal’ with in our lives.

        The real problem is the truly abhorrent abuse gets lumped in with the virtue signallers and subsequently nothing gets done.

    • ” .. in the hands of the police”? You seem to be implying he’s guilty until proved innocent. Just because the Chief Whip thought he could buy himself a breathing space by reporting Elphicke to the police, we shouldn’t assume guilt too readily. Lord Bramall was “reported to the police”: the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police ended up making him a grovelling apology.

      • The article implies that the allegations made are universally and wholly insignificant. If the allegations are sufficient to merit reporting to the police then they are criminal and not insignificant. I love the whataboutery of the Lord Bramall thing. I’ll give you some of my own. What about the girls in Rochdale, so badly let down by the police who completely dismissed their allegations? Because the allegations against Lord Bramhall were unfounded it does not mean that all allegations are unfounded.

        • You’re still getting ahead of yourself. Anyone can report anything to the police. Doesn’t mean it happened and it doesn’t mean it’s significant.
          As for Rochdale, that just demonstrates that reporting something to the police doesn’t guarantee an appropriate outcome.

  13. On yesterday’s Peston on Sunday, one of Heidi Alexander or Caroline Flint (I can’t remember which) declared that ‘women in parliament are strong….otherwise, we wouldn’t be there.’
    I don’t doubt for a moment that there are many strong women in parliament but one has to question how strong. If a touching of the knee or an off the cuff lewd comment can cause some of our women MP’s such distress that they can’t continue until they’ve unburdened themselves to whichever of the many publications appear to be lapping this up, then how can we expect them to represent their constituents in a highly stressful environment?
    If they can’t rebut someone’s advances with a simple ‘no’ or ‘get lost’, then what chance do their constituents have for their MP getting their worries and issues across in the bullpen that is the House of Commons?
    Some of these so called ‘strong women’ need to look at themselves and ask whether they’re really up to the job.

    As far as this being a coup, I don’t doubt it. Though these allegations (and that is what they are until they’re proven) will filter through all parties and organizations, it should be called out for what it is – a witchhunt against not only the government but men in general. God knows where it’ll end.

    • If women in Parliament are strong, I suggest they should have stood by Sarah Champion and the Rotherham scandal engulfing the Labour Party. I also suggest they would have stood behind the number of campaigners from all Parties who were being attacked and harassed by Momentum during the GE. No they are not strong. They are tribalists who can only operate under group think. If anyone speaks outside the circle they get de selected or lose a promotion. These women should look to Mrs Thatcher, Barabara Castle, Nancy Astor as role models. No woman in politics today is capable of holding the mantle. What a disgrace that there are more women than ever before in politics and yet we end up with a bunch of wet weeks.

      Have you noticed how they all say the same thing. They all look similar in their dress code. They all support each other even though they know the electorate think the opposite. They all shut down conversations that may harm someone’s career.

      • I have noticed that many of our women MP’s look/speak/think very similar to each other. It’s like the token groupthink/speech/dress you see with all of the BBC’s female presenters.
        It’s not just the women either. Apart from a few Conservative backbenchers (like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Phillip Davies), many of our MP’s, male and female, tend to repeat verbatim the same old tired lines.
        It’s time the good people of this country broke the mould, grow some backbone and veer away from the main parties. UKIP could have done a good job in parliament had they been given the opportunity. Let’s hope we can get a few of them in come the next election.

      • Exactly.
        Women in Parliament are neither strong nor weak.
        Overwhelmingly, MPs of both genders are lobby fodder, tribalists & subject to group think.
        Exceptions like Jacob Rees Mogg & Kate Hoey are gloriously refreshing
        exceptions to the shabby rule.

        • Correct, and what I don’t understand is how can Kate Hoey be in the Labour party with reds Corbyn, McDonald et al?

          • You could ask that of any of the so called moderates in the Labour Party. Remember, the majority of the PLP voted no confidence against dear old Steptoe when they thought he was dragging the party down. Now he’s every kiddies favourite sleb and they suddenly love him.
            An unprincipled lot, all of them.

        • Agree. Jacob is our constituent MP and although I am a UKIP member, he always has time for me. I write to him quite a lot. He replies. He gets involved in his community and he would makes an admirable PM. Kate Hooey must be the same because her majority held strong even though her constituents voted to Remain

      • Spot on! The same can be said of the BBC Women, Dress/Hair/Speach/Attitude and Behaviour. Tribaliism is alive and well. Labour Women are also pretty much the same too. And so it goes on!

    • I’ve taken to watching the occasional Peston recently out of curiosity. He is definitely off his trolley, and so full of his own importance (to him) that nobody really gets a chance to make any sort of argument. However, I was reasonably impressed by Caroline Flint , last Sunday, and have been on a few occasions recently … does make you wonder why she is still in the Labour party.

  14. Reading through the scandal headlines so far:-

    Minister thinks he is on with a female jounalist, tries to kiss her and finds he isn’t, ages ago.
    Minister does same thing and touches a very attractive knee, then is told off, ages ago.

    Minister may have slightly touched a young female political climber’s knee and sent a text referring to her promotional picture in underwear, ages ago. Discredited plod found legal porn on a Commons computer after an illegal raid and now informs on Minister he failed to prosecute ages ago.

    Minister is sacked and from Conservative Party without being told why because someone did not pursue her complaint at the time and the new chief whip needed to do something after his boss had suggested himself to take over from the minister who had to resign for trying to kiss someone.

    Gay whip called Pincher thought other men were gay and tried lifting shirts. Told to bugger off every time. Ages ago but resigns anyway.

    Gay (possibly) MP does not want to meet a contact so asks his female assistant to go instead.

    Minister gets a bit pissed with a female assistant and thinks it’s funny to buy her a vibrator but chickens out and asks her to go in the shop to buy it.

    Minister may have put his hand up a womans skirt once.

    Welsh labour boyo thought he was a whizz with the women and found out pretty soon he wasn’t.

    Two ministers listed as dodgy are exonerated by the assistants they were supposed to be dodgy with.

    List of dodgy behaviour is reported as being compiled by a person previously know as the Prince of Darkness and possibly the dodgiest person in Labour.

  15. Excellent article and the author has taken the words right out of my mouth.

    The faux virtue signalling and faux outrage demonstrated by some MPs and the press is sickening and shows then in a bad light.

  16. Important article, showing again the necessity of Con Woman in the context of a spineless establishment that has no answer to the subversion of cultural Marxism. Let’s introduce a new label for this nonsense – TOXIC FEMINISM.

    • It’s not new but it’s very apt. And the revenge-fuelled individuals propelling this witch hunt should henceforth be known as Brownskirts, after the toxic and destructive cult they follow.

      • Funnily enough, the British Union of Fascists had a very active woman’s section (this is in the 1930s, remember) in which former Suffragettes had leading roles…

  17. I know you do not talk about the labour party accusations but th emost serious one is from a women who claims she was raped and discouraged from reporting it when she mentioned it to a party official two years later.

    If she was raped why is she comfortable to mention it to party officials and the national media but unwilling to mention it to the police? It is surely a public duty to seek to bring the perpetrator of such a serious crime to justice. A lack of confidence or embarassment cannot be the reason given her involvement of the national media. We do not and may never know but a possible answer is that what she describes, even before any consideration of what the accused may say in his defence, falls far short of rape and she knows this. In this circumstance, and it is a very real possibility, the labour party official who advised her not to pursue her complaint may well have acted in her interests. That possibiltiy will never be acknowledged in the current climate but it will be portrayed as outrageous misogyny.

    • Whatever reason she had for not going to the police at the time, it’s too late now because probably impossible to prove. But in terms of smearing all men by association her willingness to talk openly to the media does the trick just as well. At the same time, her willingness to be named rather undermines the argument in favour of anonymity for alleged rape victims on the grounds that identifying them would be shameful.

      • Anonymity should be provided for both the accuser and accused. If an alleged claim turns out to be fabricated (as it has in a number of cases), the mud sticks to the accused regardless of their innocence.

  18. Laura, you have hit the nail very squarely on the head. May is acting like a rabbit caught in the headlights. She is absolutely hopeless and should be removed as soon as possible through an orderly and legitimate process. Who is behind this attempted coup?

    • May should be removed but she loves the power and will cling to it as long as she can. I predict that not only will she fight the next election but she will also fight it on Brexit. You may laugh (as my girlfriend has and many of my fellow kippers) but I don’t believe May has the slightest intention of giving up her mantle just as I don’t believe the Tories will get us out of the EU. Officially, maybe, but we’ll still be there in all but name.

    • My guess is Momentum. Planned, co-ordinated attack to destabilise Goverment? I say above, this is similar to Blair’s tactics to get Cons out when Major was PM?

  19. “witch-hunts and co-operate with media feeding frenzies to destroy a democratically elected government” where are the left also trying to do this?
    They didn’t like the uppity plebs revolting so now they are making sure they won’t ever do it again.

  20. What’s happening does have the appearance of a coup with Westminster men on the run from women accusers who can allege what they like. None of the accusations, even when admitted, rise above the pathetically trivial. The coup theory is given plausibility by Nicky Morgan, writing at the ConservativeHome. She scolds May for not exploiting the scandal to appoint women as chief whip and defence minister in a spirit of take away the boys’ toys to teach them a lesson. There’s no reason why women shouldn’t have these jobs; Germany has a female defence minister and Spain had one. But alleged male misbehaviour in unrelated areas isn’t the best justification for such appointments although it tells us that macho female elbows are just as opportunist as men’s when it comes to getting ahead. Morgan also wants to overhaul the way Westminster works to make it more female-friendly which is a heavy agenda to repose on a single uncorroborated spreadsheet. At this rate, we’ll be turning the whole country upside down by the end of the week. Never let a good hysteria go to waste, as Rahm Emanuel didn’t say.

    • That’s the thing. It will end, because it’s all smoke and mirrors, but it will only end when one of the poltroons has had enough and stands up on his back feet and fights back. Until then, you have essentially no government because of a few ridiculously petty accusations.

    • I think the current Trotskyite leadership would have reservations about Ms Phiiips,
      though Harman would be OK, following her excellent works of destruction
      via the NCCL, continued by the Chakrabarti woman

  21. The Damian Green claims seem more to do with revenge by Quick than anything else. Quick raided Green’s office in parliament to find out who was leaking embarassing immigration figures during Brown’s era. He got a slap on the wrist for it and this seems to be payback time. There are various attributions from a computer in his office, to his own computer. Nobody has actually claimed that it was Green who downloaded them, it is merely left to the treader to infer. Green himself has strenuously denied the claims. If they were on his password protected Home drive , it would be easy to find out, and difficult to deny. I doubt that it was for that reason.

    • Blair used similar tactics against Major. Destabilise by smearing with Sex/Security/Loyalty inuendo? The Grant Schapps episode was the begining of this hoohaa, since then it has dripped on. Will continue to do so untill someone puts a firm stop to it?

  22. I would like to know who created the spreadsheet? And when? This information should be available by checking the spreadsheet File Info tab.

  23. I’m only aware of a couple of serious incidents, the rest is bad manners that,
    at worst, deserves a slap round the face.
    Let’s not forget a couple of weeks back, the MSM were preparing us for WW3
    initiated by North Korea.
    Labour has been infiltrated over the last few years by Trotskyite extremists, &
    they do have form in accepting rape & sexual abuse as part of their general moral
    The Labour lady, who courageously came out as a rape victim, is the only one I’d
    take seriously.
    It all comes down to our having too many politicians with not enough to do, since
    we are currently governed by a foreign power with no pretences of being democratic.

    • ‘The Labour lady, who courageously came out as a rape victim, is the only one I’d
      take seriously.’

      Unless you know something we don’t, that is still an allegation. If it were to be true then the perpetrator must be given a hefty sentence. As it is, these are still allegations and any intended culprit should be deemed as innocent until proven guilty.

      • Quite agree. Trial by MSM, is absolutely not acceptable. The Law Prescribes ‘Innocence untill proven Guilty’ is being ignored, as a result if any of these allegations did go to Court it would be very difficult to rely on the decision of the Judge and/or Jury?

      • The Labour lady who came out as a rape victim did not report it to the police. I fully understand why she did not do that, but having not done it, she has thoroughly discredited her claim. If you regard your political career as more important than what is done to your body, you are engaging in a transaction from which you hope to benefit, and complaining after you have reaped the benefits is, frankly, dishonest.

        • Yep, I try not to judge Brits by American standards.But if she were American like most of Weinstein’s ‘victims’, I would say she made her bargain and lived up to it until she saw a better chance by doing something else. We used to have a not overly polite term for such people.

    • The UK has 73 MEPs -most of whom ATTEND and participate conscientiously and many of whom publish their tax returns.

      • None of whom has any power worth talking about.
        The UK is ruled by non elected, mainly Continental bureaucrats of the type
        that flourished during the Second World War.
        The UK contingent are simply Quislings.

        • 750 MEPs are all elected, 73 being from the UK in proportion to population size.
          That’s nearly 10% as only one nation out of 27.

          There is a certain ex UKIP leader who as MEP who (patriotically) continues to draw circa £80k per annum yet declines to publish his tax returns and also voted against greater transparency in expenses claims for some reason. Only one MEP, a disabled Irish gent had a worse attendance record.

          The EU isn’t perfect but there are debates and there are votes.
          Who in the UK voted for the DUP in Governnent at a cost of £1.5 billion (possibly contrary to the bribary act??)

  24. Looks like Amburka rudderless and appeaser may are depressed because they didn’t get any attention because they are both ugly, maybe the are lezbefreinds?

  25. Laura Perrins states: “But we will not blindly accept witch-hunts and co-operate with media
    feeding frenzies to destroy a democratically elected government. This isn’t a sex scandal; it’s an attempted coup.”

    Indeed it is, which makes the antics of Theresa May and Amber Rudd so tragic. Why on earth are they supporting this clearly politicised assault on their own party?

    • Because for them it is about power and nothing else. Oh, yes, they can virtue signal with the best of them but as long as they retain their cushy positions, MPs across their party can come and fall where they may.

    • Because they, like the majority of our political, social and cultural elites, have swallowed the lies propagated by the Cult of Social Justice and Identity Politics wholesale.

    • Simple. May has only got to where she is by riding the feminist wave. She is way above her capabilities, but to consolidate he position she has to keep surfing that wave. Rudd wants to emulate her.

      • I don’t agree. May is where she is because she was able to unite (aka mollify, quiet down or something like that) the parliamentary party after Cameron turned tail. Nothing to do with feminism.
        None of us are very happy, although I, for one, am greatly impressed by her perseverance and courage under constant fire.

      • Amber Rudd is an ally of T-May, but I do wish she would get on with her own job i.e. deporting the 56,000 “disappeared” illegals still floating about the country, and the traffickers and slave labour bosses, together with those they have trafficked into the country. What can be so difficult for goodness’ sake. It also makes my blood boil when demands to allow all the illegals found residing in Grenfell are given in to by the PM. Why? Pressure from Momentum once again.

    • Mrs May is between Devil & Deep Blue Sea. If she overides it all, the Feminazi brigade will never let it go. She has to be seen to be doing something but why Rudd is involving herself is just to keep up. More to the point if she did more to protect the Sex Abusers, Trafickers etc., deporting Illegals and so on, her time as HS would be better spent.

  26. I agree with you absolutely in this article, Laura, and, like you, think that Peter Hitchens has nailed this current moral panic for what it is and where it could go very accurately indeed in his recent Mail On Sunday piece. However, I wish I could share your optimism that most people can see through this hysteria: as a musician, I spend a great deal of time (a lot of it by neccessity rather than choice) moving in what could be called liberal circles, both in reality and online, and the bulk of my friends and acquaintances seem to have swallowed the progressive “narrative” hook, line and sinker. Given that artists and academics have a cultural influence out of all proportion to their actual numbers, I’m feeling increasingly pessimistic that sanity and a sense of balance will be restored to our society any time soon.

    • Yes, indeed. The constant parade of left-liberal (often far-left) views from the arts and academic sectors. I just wonder whether there is a pre-exposure Harvey Weinstein parallel to this. Actresses coming forward now say that they did not want to speak up because they feared losing their chances of progressing in their careers, such was the pressure from all quarters to keep quiet and pretend powerful men were always benevolent and that the casting couch no longer existed.
      In the same way, those lucky enough to make a living from the very competitive arts and academic worlds know that it would be career suicide (or at least career limiting) to voice political views outside the progressive agenda. Such is the pressure from the news media, who can also make and break careers, that even plain good sense has to be couched in self-abasing virtue-signalling terms.
      The rest of us know that this is another step towards a repressive society.

      • A first step in tackling this problem might be to abolish all state support (from any source, including local government) for the arts. Spend the money on arts education in schools – and make sure this is ‘how to do it’ not ‘what art you should/should not watch/look at/read/participate in” . Use the money perhaps to make sure that EVERY child can read music and play an instrument.

        So what would happen to funding for the arts? A combination of takings at the box office and royalties for income, and crowdfunding for new projects, should do it.

    • The ordinary folk are the ones thinking sense on these matters so don’t worry too much about the potential effect on votes. Criminal offences are one thing, a bit of an overly affectionate hug after a few beers is something else entirely.

  27. This is the list of nominally Conservative ladies who have attacked the government during this crisis or poured petrol on the flames:
    Andrea Leadsom: transparently used the opportunity to take revenge on Michael Fallon
    Amber Rudd: called for a clean-out, again clearly to get a reshuffle for her own advantage
    Heidi Allen: taking revenge on Damien Green for his previous ‘is she a Conservative?’ joke (which coming from somebody as left-wing as Green says something)
    Anna Soubry: Her love of Europe is clearly outweighed by her hatred of Therese May and anybody close to her, particularly fellow die-hard Remainer, Damien Green
    Kate Malby (referred to as a Conservative activist in the press but really just another progressive journalist) who apparently victimised Green, using him for gossip whilst pretending to be interested in his sexual advances, at least according to her own account.
    Fortunately, there’s a longer list of Conservative women with some common sense but you won’t of heard from them recently.

    • Whenever you use the words “Amber Rudd” you should mentally substitute “George Osborne” since she is just his puppet. The fact that she’s on maneuvers means that this is somehow connected to the Blackrock gang; almost certainly with a view to reversing Brexit.

  28. ‘This isn’t a sex scandal; it’s an attempted coup.’ Which is exactly what it is, aided and abetted by a so-called Tory MP suggesting that by-elections are the only way to resolve this.

    And Corbyn is there like a rat up a drainpipe with his assertion, in Blackpool yesterday, that he ‘committed the Labour party to tackling the “warped and degrading” culture of sexual harassment in work places.’ Abuse has ‘been hiding in plain sight’ he told delegates. Making the most of Tory spreadsheets and conservatives openly displaying their dirty washing.

    Dishonest and typically opportunistic Corbyn and the people in the shadows for whom he is a front have been, ‘hiding from plain sight’ the numbers of serious allegations against his own people.

    That he promoted an ally MP to the shadow cabinet despite him being accused of wrongdoing was in Corbyn’s judgement OK (so much then for the so called independent investigation supposedly now under way, the leader has spoken and that will go nowhere). Then there are the others. John Mann was set to name a fellow Labour MP accused of serious sexual misconduct while abroad, that was until Labour’s Speaker John Bercow apparently intervened and asked him not to do so. And while the BBC are happy to get excited by Tory wrongdoing – and not so wrongdoing, apart from a perfunctory references, they seem to lack the same zeal and curiosity when it comes to the even more serious accusations against Labour MPs and activists.

    Make no mistake the intention of the left is to paint this as an almost exclusively Tory problem

  29. The feminists need to decide which one of their narratives is true. Are women strong, decisive and indomitable or soft kitteny little creatures who are forever at the whim and oppression of nasty, brutish men? They can’t have it both ways, although it seems they like to change their perceived status with the same regularity that they change their knickers. I don’t wake up in the morning and say, ‘today I shall wear a blue dress, black shoes and accessorise with my personae of victim.’ It simply doesn’t work girls.
    There is, however, another question to be asked amidst all this fuss and that is are these trembling little flowers suited to high office? If a woman can be reduced to to a quivering wreck by a man brushing her knee how will she fare in a heated debate or under intensive journalistic scrutiny? Look at Emily Thornberry accusing Dermot Murnaghan of sexism just because she didn’t know the answer to his question. Not to mention Abbott and Butler etc. These women seek some of the highest positions in the land and yet when they are criticised or examined they seek refuge in the safety of their imagined victimhood. Would they react the same with a foreign minister or head of state in negotiations that could prevent national calamity or war? The consequences of these women behaving like indignant little misses could be catastrophic.
    I’m all for women in positions of power but like everything else in life this should based upon their merits to do the job. Any woman who cannot put down a fumbling attempt at a pass will never be able to check the duplicitous intentions of a foreign aggressor or trade negotiator. Man up ladies and ask yourself ‘what would Maggie do?’

    • ‘They can’t have it both ways, although it seems they like to change their perceived status with the same regularity that they change their knickers.’

      Do modern feminazi’s change their knickers? Do they wear knickers especially since they’d see them as some sort of masculine driven form of oppression? In today’s males are bad, women are strong/weak/brilliant/voiceless culture, you just never know.

      • Feminists do want it both ways and, as I’ve stated before, they want the nice cushy well paid posts but not he nasty, dirty jobs.

        • You know, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bin lady – ever. Or a woman doing office/furniture removal. Will we ever see the Beeb do a section for women in menial jobs? Like hell.

          • No as the BBC are too intent on the wonderful work done by women in the social services or justifying their role in wartime.

          • No, but I have seen plenty of women making school dinners in a clean warm dry environment claim that they are doing a similar job to binMEN

          • There was a very glamourous lady on the bin lorries in Watford a few years back. I don’t know if she’s still there.

        • Would like to get a load of BBC wimmin and make them dig the road up for a week or two with obligatory bumcrack!

      • May I suggest to you and Tee2 that you read, in full, the Kate Maltby article from the Times, about her ‘relationship’ with Damien Green? I think if you read it objectively, which I am sure you both would do, you will find wirhin it the aswer to many of the questions you both allude to. Forgive me if you have already read it but I am keeping it because she has put into words, by a Woman, just how a woman can wriggle, wrangle and divert a complete non-story in to a non-story that can cause so much damage? It is shaming.

        • I did indeed read Kate Malby’s ramblings( ‘All Women know the difference between a hand and a tablecloth.’) and I’m in complete agreement with you. She certainly knows how to wring her hands and play the victim. I was particularly impressed by the implication that anyone who expressed scepticism regarding the alleged incidents were themselves reprehensible misogynists complicit in the subjugation of women. Oh poor little Katie how traumatic it must’ve been to have sat on this pointless (and possibly inaccurate) piece of gossip before opportunistically stabbing a friend in the back in order to garner a career boast, discredit men in general and potentially ruin someone’s life. The MSM and liberal left elite are so besotted by the feminist agenda that they will not question any accusation made by women and that is where the true abuse of power lies, the ability of any rabid feminazi to destroy a man with an unverified allegation. Ms Maltby may know the difference between a hand and a tablecloth but I doubt she, or her ilk, can tell the difference between right and wrong.

        • I haven’t actually read it. My girlfriend was reading it while I was chuckling at Liddle but from the gist of it, it appeared to be a narcissistic rant about how all men are vile perverts and how she has embraced the role of victim – is that about the size of it?
          I did notice the headline though – All women know the difference between a hand and a tablecloth. But do they? Gingham is pretty heavy, you know.

    • “Would they react the same with a foreign minister or head of state in
      negotiations that could prevent national calamity or war? The
      consequences of these women behaving like indignant little misses could
      be catastrophic”.

      Ah, but the get-out would be that “if we were all girls together, we wouldn’t have these confrontational situations engineered by those nasty men, and could reach agreement and save the world over a cuppa”.

      As they say, pull the other one, it’s got tinkly bits on.

  30. Miss Perrins, what adults legally do with their wobbly bits is no concern of either the government or the media. Accusations of illegal goings-on should be examined in exactly the same way that other breaches of the law are investigated, not blown up for trial by Twitter.

    I know it’s not so much fun, but I’d like to see investigative journalists looking into the way our money is being spent — there are hints and half-said stories of about HS2, LEPs, the push for regional government etc which should be looked into, not least to remove suspicion from those who are guiltless.

    You could start here:http://stevebarclay.net/nao-confirms-it-will-now-investigate-cambridgeshire-funding-body-as-the-leps-own-response-descends-into-farce/


  31. Judging by her views, calling Anna Soubry a conservative, seems to strip the word of any objective meaning.

    • Can’t argue with that. She should go and flirt with Vince or maybe sit on MaoDonnell’s lap in order to discuss her future options.
      But Conservatives? One has to look bloody hard to find any even after Soubry’s been taken out of the equation.

      • She is the black widow spider sitting in her corner and hatching the plots to make the UK remain in the EU by bringing down the Government. She is ruthless but maybe Leadsom is too? She always wanted the job of PM.

  32. At the 2015 WOW Festival in Cambridge, (WOW stands for ‘Women of the World’) Rae Langton, a professor at the local university, chaired a session with this remarkable programme:

    ‘Gender-based violence in its many forms seems to have become an almost accepted backdrop to society. This session will challenge this ‘normalisation’ and put the case that to live in a world where women are not attacked or hurt in their daily lives – physically, sexually or virtually is possible.’

    Presumably, when the feminists at the session and like-minded feminists have waved their magic wand, Islamic suicide bombers will spare the women and only target boys and men. Any man high on drugs who’s about to attack a woman will decide not to. It won’t be necessary to lock up male rapists of women because there won’t be any of these rapes. Taxpayers will save millions and millions, on prisons and the police, for example, as the crime rate falls dramatically – thanks to these Cambridge feminists and their colleagues. Not only that, but women won’t be hurt ‘virtually.’

    I didn’t attend the session. I don’t know if there was any mention of the methods to be used. The coming to power of the Women’s Equality Party, which will then make punishments for attacking or hurting women so ferocious that no man will think about attacking or hurting a woman? Or the rapid spread of feminism throughout society, changing the climate of opinion so radically that the radical feminist heaven on earth is achieved?

    • Perhaps Ms Langton would like to start her crusade in certain areas of Bradford, Rochdale and Rotherham where her statement might at least have some element of truth – if what we hear from the women affected is true. But, no of course she wouldn’t – that’s no what she means at all !!

      • She’d have to find someone in Rochdale first! I went back there recently to see my mum and the place is a ghost town. Successive Labour MPs have turned it into a ghetto…..but that’s another story.

    • The fact remain that when the ‘Femmist’ brigade do have to join the real World, leave their over protective Unis, homes or whatever ‘safe space’ they inhabit, they are never going to cope without being very hurt, one way or the other. The work place is not a ‘safe space’

      it is somewhere you go to earn a living and whilst the majority of people would not go out of their way to hurt another, people do not have time to deal with delicate flowers. This is time to toughen up, learn to say firmly ‘Foxtrot Oscar’ when necessary and get on with your life. That’s when the problems begin and we go off in to the Mental Health issue and the rest. Over protecting is not doing anyone any favours.

  33. It’s time we set up an Anti-Feminist League – all gender’s welcome; these people endanger women as well as men, and have no regard whatever for the real industrial scale rape that is happening in this country. Peter Hitchens article yesterday in The Times was spot on. I’d encouage men to start fighting back, for all our sakes.

    • Anti-modern, third-wave feminism, for sure. I think feminism needs to rediscover the more traditional ideas of feminism, one of which was a great respect and admiration of men, recognizing the contribution that great men have made to human civilization, thought and progress.

      Modern feminism has turned into a hate-fest against men, stoking and feeding a rabid desire to destroy men and drive them completely out of certain fields, such as politics, as well as pathologize masculinity, even to the point of trying to beat masculinity out of young boys, giving them drugs to assist in doing so.

      This stuff, along with the recent “liberalization” of transgenderism, has gone too far.

      • I’d like to describe feminism as the “anti-Semitism of the 21st Century”, but the resurrection of the old darkness in the Labour Party prevents me from doing so.

      • You are so right about the “politics” angle. Just think across the spectrum of Government, devolved institutions and leaders of political parties. Most are women, except for Corbyn, Welsh Jones and Toe-suck of Rep of Ireland. Also, I think Bercow is controlled by that very tall feminist wife of his and she’s Labour and he also said in Parliament (where he supposed not to be biased) that he had voted Remain in the EU-Ref.

    • Anything that opposes the so-called “progressives” would be quickly characterised as nasty and extremist. So an “anti-feminist league” would be accused of misogyny and wanting to re-establish the so-called “patriarchy”.

      It is becoming more and more difficult to dissent from the feminist orthodoxy, or all the other orthodoxies of the left, without being denounced as “far right fanatics”, etc. That is all part of the very clever Marcusean plan. To replace tolerance and free speech with a leftist regulated public narrative. They create the words and decide what they should mean to create the most binary pro-left and anti-right narrative and the media and even the Tories go along with it.

        • Just don’t call it the Anti-Feminist League – it’s not too much of a push from Antifa and we know what horrible little tykes they are.
          Maybe the ‘You don’t have to look like Merkel to be macho’ league. Actually no, that’s crap.

          • Just a thought: Does “Conservative Woman” not cover what it is you are trying to establish? We are conservative, yet we are women. But as part of the charter, men would be welcome because part of being a real woman is loving men…?

          • “part of being a real woman is loving men ..”
            I’m not entirely sure that real women love men, but they do love their sons.

          • Well, I love my husband and sons and grandsons. Many feminists do not love men and do not want sons, grandsons (or daughters). Our young men are under-performing in many areas of their lives because of feeling unappreciated, despised or made to feel worth nothing. So, yes, I love men for who they are and the jobs they do as parents, and in the many professions such as police, health, defence and others too numerous to name here.

      • Perhaps we should adopt the practice of ‘ketman’* – pretend to be of the Marxist faith in order to enter the house of the enemy, then once there work from the inside to cause havoc (more prosaically, spout the right drivel to get into positions of authority, then carry out ‘research’ and at a convenient time, work to cause chaos in organisations which have a strong PC agenda).

        *Sorry, I’ve just read “The Captive Mind” by Czeslaw Milosz, the late Polish (later, after defecting) American poet and writer. Milosz describes the practice of ketman.

      • The problem for the “progressives” is that sooner or later their innate irrationality catches up with them. As their command of logic and willingness to debate are both somewhere between poor and non-existent they cannot anticipate the problems that will be thrown up by the unending stream of new “oppressions” that are constantly minted.

        First we had the feminists, then gay rights activists, now trans activists. The first two groups now often find themselves attacked by the last one, for example when Germaine Greer and Peter Tatchell were “no-platformed”. Similarly, feminists are not too happy about the proposed removal of ‘woman’ from the Census questions as this will make research into female “oppression” very difficult (!).

        Those wishing to cause mischief could exploit these internal Left conflicts (see my post on ‘ketman’, below).

    • My dear mum, quantum rest her soul, who was a proper feminist, would have reacted to a grope by grabbing the offending wrist and announcing “Who’s grubby little paw is this?” at which point the lech would scarper if at all possible, or stand sheepishly looking at his shoes.

      I know this to be true, because it happened at least twice when I was a nipper as we travelled on the bus together. I suspect she’d have been absolutely disgusted by this current mob queueing up to out-victim each other.

      Feminism is, sadly, still necessary in some places. What we could all do without is the misandrist social engineering of the lefty mob that wears feminism’s coat.

    • Well said and I agree. Our young men have become so emasculated that they are afraid to act like men in case their “partners” give them the shove.

  34. I have no love for the Tory party historically, but as I have read all the stories of abuse and so on, I have become more convinced than ever that there is something unsavoury going on, which has nothing to do with sex. I fully agree with Laura Perrins, that there is something very dodgy going on, and a ‘coup’ seems to describe it clearly.

    How many of those complained about or who complained are opposed to Brexit? Well we know Sourby is certainly a leader in this. Not complaining for 10, 20 or more years and then suddenly becoming seriously concerned just does not wash. To be honest, I don’t believe any of them. Labour are playing a clever game. Just sitting back, making the right noises of disgust at the supposed actions, they are so seriously offended that one of their own who was complained about was put into the shadow cabinet and his leader did not consider it a problem. This whole thing has been cooked up by Corbyn, the remainers and the EU officials Labour met with recently.

    • I think we have two factions here, both connected with Labour. Momentum is desperate, absolutely desperate to get their puppet Corbyn into No 10. Mainly for their own Political agenda. They are, I believe using the tactic of diversion to get what they want. Whilst everyone is looking at the Tory antics going on they are not watching too closely what Labour are doing. Since all this has kicked off we hear no more about Jared O’Mara, the Momentun ‘Youth connection’ Mobster, he is still an MP? Plus whatever else they are up to, Corbyn popping up here and there. The second faction is Blair,Cambel, Mandy, Miller, Clegg The EU & Co. who are equally desperate to stop Brexit, again to meet their own Agenda. Blair ousted Major by creating similar scandals as we are having at the moment? Tigers don’t change their Stripes very often. The other unknown but certainly not unconnected factor is the Soros influnence over the Blair party? Who is in whose pocket will eventually emerge, but whichever way it is dressed, it is a threat. A very real threat.

      • Regardless of what agenda is being played by whichever party, 80% of the country can feel happy with the fact that they voted these muppets in as opposition and government.
        I hope that come 2022, we might think of giving someone else a go but our general population will always look to one of two parties despite the fact that they are essentially the same outfit.

      • Do not forget the influence of Jon Lansman, the elite multi-millionaire Communist backer and founder of Momentum. Ironic that. Supposed to be “socialist” but lives in one of the most expensive addresses in London. He most probably knows all the contacts to gain access to those off-shore accounts too. The UK CP and RED-Labour are all Republicans and hate the monarchy, so that is their angle. Which was the first item on the BBC news? Why, all about the queen’s [quite legitimate] investments off-shore (that she really did not have a clue about) and that had been put there by her financial advisers. The aim to rile all those little RED-Labour sheep, driven on by Momentum of the UK Communist Party to hate the rich – whoever they may be.

  35. Apart from the mispronunciation of harassment ( in this country) has no journalist or politician bothered to look up the definition of harassment? None of the reports of “unwanted”sexual advances seem to include the essential component of persistence.

  36. The demonisation of men (and boys at school) could be exploited by adherents of Islam. Islam is unashamedly male-orientated, which could make it very attractive to people (men) told virtually from birth that they are stupid, useless and sexual predators. Where do you go if you are a pariah and someone smiling beckons from an open door? Which ‘narrative’ do you choose when all but one portray you as an object of disgust?

    The many in academe, the MSM and government who have an instinctive (it’s hardly a product of cool reason) hatred of ‘white males’ and Christianity might like to pause to think for a moment where their ‘narrative’ (i.e. bigotry) is taking them. The destination might not be the one they anticipated.

  37. I’ve just read a report about this lass with the corset. Apparently, she posed in her underwear and then complained that she got a suggestive text message from an unpleasant fellow to whom, presumably, she had previously given her phone number. Have I got that right?

    • Yes, but he was wrong to read anything in to her posing seductively in her underwear. She was doing it for her own emotional validation or something, err, damn the patriarchy, free the nipple, down with the male gaze, #blindfolds4men.

      Back in the day you could have told her not to dress like a tart and put her picture in public in front of millions of people if she didn’t want to open anyone’s mind to the idea that she was um, sexually interesting. But of course these days, any man who reaches out is a sleazy perv, unless he isn’t (i.e. the woman was already interested).

      The only solution is telepathy for straight men, so they can know if its safe to make a pass beforehand. God knows, if we rely on the female of the species, the human race will go extinct within a generation or two…

  38. Unfortunately, Westminster is not the only place where feminist tactics of sexual abuse claims are designed to bring down men who they do not like or can’t beat in a fair manner. These same tactics are used to relieve men of their families, houses and jobs.
    To ruin men’s careers, from the film industry all the way to the government .Extortion of men is another byproduct. Time is high to modify laws under which such abuse claims are even accepted. Unless we come up with laws to curtail these often exaggerated and opportunistic claims, men and women will have to be segregated by gender as working together under current rules is becoming unbearable. For men that is.

  39. “So that’s 14 years in the lobby, and she was mistreated in this way once.”

    Yes, which is why we have to burn down Westminster, to teach men a lesson they’ll never forget.

    “Bring the men into line when they step out of line; there is in fact nothing new in women ‘telling men how we expected them to behave’.”

    They can tell us all they like, but as the declining rates of marriage, and the increasing age of the bride and groom show, most of us have stopped listening.

      • Sadly Janet, there are also male feminists! Even apparently straight ones… but yes, there are obviously normal straight women out there who are still getting married and having children with their husbands. Don’t take the rantings of the internet totally seriously ;p . Even today half of all marriages endure, and that’s for decades longer than our ancestors generally managed back in the ‘stricter’ day…

  40. New rules for women in Westminster.
    1/. Never be alone with any man–at least four people of mixed gender and sexual preferences to be present at all times.
    2/. No woman to appear in revealing clothing or have her hair, face, arms or legs visible.
    3/.No alcohol to be consumed or present on the Parliamentary estate.
    4/.Women must always keep their eyes downcast less they inflame male desires.
    5/.All conversations between women and men to be conducted through a male relative of the woman.
    6/. Women must not sit in the chamber alongside men, but at the back on their own.

    That’ll fix it.

    • The feminazi’s would still argue with that. What they’d want is the castration of any man who enters into the House of Commons.

    • I’m pretty sure the feminists have no interest in whether they ‘inflame male desires’ or not, (in fact I rather think they’d enjoy the idea that they could dress like tarts and watch men squirm as they tried not look at anything which could be misconstrued).
      I suspect that the true objective is to oust all men from Parliament and let the loony left feminazi’s take charge. Lets face it with female only short lists becoming the norm it may only be a matter of time.

    • So, Parliament will effectively end up looking like one of those segregated meetings the Labour Party organize for Muslims?

    • I’m beginning to wonder if it was such a good idea to give women the vote in the first place. I can’t help thinking we took a wrong turn after the Middle Ages when we abolished the Sumptuary laws and did away with chastity belts and covering up furniture legs. No
      need for women to be made to wear burkhas, a wimple can look quite sexy if worn at a jaunty angle.

          • For who can denie but it repugneth to nature, that the blind shal be appointed to leade and conduct such as do see? That the weake, the sicke, and impotent persones shall norishe and kepe the hole and strong, and finallie, that the foolishe, madde and phrenetike shal gouerne the discrete, and giue counsel to such as be sober of mind? And such be al women, compared vnto man in bearing of authoritie. For their sight in ciuile regiment, is but blindnes: their strength, weaknes: their counsel, foolishenes: and judgement, phrenesie, if it be rightlie considered.

            Had a point, didn’t he?

    • Simpler still: just apply Sharia Law. That way you can make Sharia lovers happy, and maybe they reduce their terrorism just a little.

  41. “allegedly lunged for a kiss at another 29-year-old after a slightly boozy lunch.”

    My sister-in-law is Italian. She’s constantly kissing me: “Buon giorno!” *kiss* “Grazi!” *kiss* “Ciow!” *kiss kiss*. My God, if I screamed sexual harassment every single time, you’d swear we were making porn!

    There’s a difference between a kiss and a snog, for crying out loud! Was he just trying to give her an affectionate peck? Who hasn’t?

    • A handshake is better than a kiss or a hug. I don’t partake in all this European wishy-washiness!

    • The Italians used to pinch the bum in appreciation. Does it still happen. I had a friend working in Florence many years ago. I visited her quite a bit and absolutely loved the flirtatiousness of the men and women. I also remember the wolf whistles from the labourers as us girls walked by. We always swung our hips a little more provocatively and giggled as we acknowledged their appreciation. What fun it used to be, and yet we all knew how to deal with the real pests. Mum always said it is good to look at the goods but never let them touch. Your integrity and strength is in your womanhood. It seems all the free love and liberalisation of the sexes has done more harm than good.

  42. Unfortunately Ms Perrins demonstrates that some women can be pretty stupid. Is some embellishment going on? is some of it relatively innocent? Almost certainly. On the other hand middle aged men hitting on much younger women and even worse groping them is rather gross behavior by any standards and would get you fired in most major corporations. There is no reason these jerks should get away with it just because they are being paid out of the public purse. And for all the jackasses below trying justify or rationalize this nonsense how would they feel if their wife or daughter was subjected to this sort of conduct. Maybe they wouldn’t care which really tells you all you need to know about their personal characters.

    • If someone groped a man or woman at work (and I mean seriously, not a hand on a knee), then they should be subject to repercussions. However, hitting on someone else is not a crime. Why is it gross that a man, or woman for that matter, should be attracted to someone of the opposite sex and maybe ask her out? She can always say no.
      As for your other dubious statement, no one is trying to rationalize sexual harassment, they’re trying to put it into context. And many of these allegations are just that – innocent until proven guilty, remember.
      If anyone made a pass at my girlfriend, she’d give them the short sharp as I’d expect. Anything worse and they’d get it both barrels from both of us.

      • I’m remembering a night a decade ago in the Poet’s Corner in Cardiff when a new, distinctly tasty, girl had started working behind the bar. She was lovely! Very cute, loads of fun, my mates and I flirted like crazy with her until chucking-out time. As we left, considerably worse for wear, I made some suggestive comment. She replied something about her husband, who was standing right next to her!

        I asked, with some surprised, “Are you her husband?” He assured me he was. I replied, “Then you are one of the luckiest men in the world!”

        He answered, “No, I’m the luckiest man in the world!”

        And we all went on our way, having had a great evening, a lot of fun, no harm done, nobody offended, everybody on good terms. Why does an appreciation of feminine charms have to be a bad thing?

        • What a lovely story and one which should be of many.
          When I’m out with my girlfriend, blokes check her out and I love it – it’s such a compliment, in many ways, to both of us.
          You can window shop as long as you don’t nab the goods.
          I haven’t been to Cardiff in years but remember Poet’s Corner well. How are things down that neck of the woods?

          • They’ve demolished it! A terrible tragedy, but I think it’s yet another victim of the smoking ban. Formerly a heaving venue and worlds of fun, its business dropped overnight and never really picked up again. A real shame for one of the most characterful pubs anywhere in south Wales, never mind Cardiff! It’s just a building site now.

          • What a shame. My girlfriend just asked if I could show her one day – damn the bloody smoking ban, it’s done for so many watering holes.

          • It was the final straw. I wonder where all those people who objected so strongly to smokers spoiling their enjoyment of a Blue Lagoon are drinking now.

    • These people have been elected to Parliament. Barring a prison sentence, they have the right to represent their constituents until another election is called. We really do not want to change that.
      As it happens, my daughter was subjected to fairly frequent sexual abuse at her comprehensive school. She was a great deal less naive than I was at the same age (we had single sex grammar schools in my day), and a dab hand at the knee to the groin.

  43. The Prime Minister is, according to a t-shirt she once worse, “what a feminist looks like”. I don’t think this campaign is there to *destabilise* her government.

      • 66

        Anyway, politically what we must not tolerate is a fake news scandal aimed at trying to bring this government down. No website has been more critical of the Conservative party and its policies than The Conservative Woman. But we will not blindly accept witch-hunts and co-operate with media feeding frenzies to destroy a democratically elected government. This isn’t a sex scandal; it’s an attempted coup.


        In the modern UK, the “government” is, in effect, the PM. This “media feeding frenzy” BENEFITS Mrs May, by creating an additional problem for any rival to Mrs May for the Tory leadership who happens to be male, the abusive sex. I therefore doubt the conspiracy theory that the purpose of this “fake news scandal” is “bring this government down”. If we must theorise as to the purpose of the conspirators behind this upsurge of fake news, then I’d venture that it is It is more likely to be an inside job, intended to prop Mrs May up a bit longer.

        As long as the dumbed down feminist doctrine holds sway, that, of the two sexes, men and boys are the baddies, whilst women and girls are the goodies (and the victims of the baddies ofttimes), a female PM’s position is less assailable than otherwise, however much it would be best for the country if the queen were to find herself asking a different Tory leader to form a new government in the near future.

        • Your theory makes no sense if Damian Green is actually caught in this – he is the Mayist Leader isn’t he?

          • Damian Green is to Theresa May merely as John Prescott was to Tony Blair. May’s interest is in having loyal yes-men around her. A chap with one of the most powerful feminists in the world as his boss, who in a spot of bother with the feminists in general, which that feminist boss of his might be able to fix for him, had better stay very loyal to his said boss.

    • Have to disagree – it most certainly is to do exactly that. Why is so little said about Bex Bailey the girl who was brutally raped by a Labour person. Actual rape is much more serious than what used to be termed flirting or coming on but nothing resulting from it – other than a firm put down by the woman concerned. This whole thing is ridiculous and taking up far too much time instead of the focus being on Brexit and that is what the witches of the backbenches want

      • We’ll have to agree to differ, as to which conspiracy theory is more credible. I thought mine up, on the spur of the moment, just to show that Laura Perrin’s wasn’t necessarily a racing certainty. I’m not emotionally attached to it, so you are welcome to pull it to pieces, and assert your faith in Laura’s original explanation of the purpose for the media storm-in-a-teacup.

  44. Someone must have worked it out that the daily screaming about NHS privatisation, or job insecurity of the working class, etc., no longer has the potency to destabilise the government, and so those complaints have now been replaced by fake sex scandal.
    Another factor in the problem is that the Snowflake generation who must permanently reside in hermetically sealed Safe Spaces, can no longer cope in human situations, and are not even able to understand the situation until it is too late. So, for example, we have a girl who goes to a hotel room to conduct serious business – my generation used to use offices for business – finds herself alone with a naked man, and proceeds to massage the naked man, still not realising that this is not supposed to be her business. If this generation of people become the sole occupiers of the land, they will make easy pray for any aggressive predator enemies who would want to become the master race, and destroy democracy for their own supremacist ideology.

  45. I think that this has all been stirred up by a certain person with initials AS – ssssoooooobry. She wants things to explode at Westminster because she wants to remain in the EU and she short-sightedly thinks this is the way to get her own way! She sits in her corner on the backbenches pushing her own agenda like a widow spider in its lair. I would just love if something came up where she was named as a bully….

    • I’d be surprised if Soubry had a master plan, although I suspect she’d be happy to do the dirty work of Blair, Mandelson, Cleggy paying their dues to some nasty suits in the EU.

  46. There seems to be a mix here of (i) middle aged (and old) men making fools of themselves with young women by misreading some signals and making a foolish pass [nothing new there then]; and (ii) extremely nasty (and illegal) sexual harassment and sexual assault. Best to separate these out and punish the latter.

  47. Now here is a set of morals our the feminists consider “empowering”

    A Disney Princess…Ariana Grande

    I’m talkin’ to ya
    See you standing over there with your body
    Feeling like I wanna rock with your body
    And we don’t gotta think ’bout nothin’ (’bout nothin’)
    I’m comin’ at ya
    Cause I know you got a bad reputation
    Doesn’t matter, ’cause you give me temptation
    And we don’t gotta think ’bout nothin’ (’bout nothin’)

    …This the new style with the fresh type of flow
    Wrist icicle, ride dik bicycle
    Come through yo, get you this type of blow
    If you wanna Minaj, I got a tricycle

    Reputation doesn’t matter; temptation is good. So what? Well…

    “Wrist icicle” is when someone manually m@sturb@tes a man, he ej@cul@tes, and the giver then has ej@cul@te dripping from their wrist.

    “If you wanna MÉNAGE”, ménage a trois, …….with three people.

    Here’s ‘Right There‘:

    A player too, you know I have some girls missionary
    My black book and numbers thicker than the dictionary and Bible
    I got it recycled…

    Lyrics care of Cranmer Website

  48. Speaking of unintended consequences …. today, I had lunch with an old friend who runs a very successful business in London, employing a few hundred people. He said that about 12 months ago, he stopped employing women – it just wasn’t worth the risk. Today, he pointed to the allegations of wrong-doing at Westminster and cited it as an example of how accusations can destroy careers without a shred of evidence offered. For him and his fellow partners, they didn’t want everything they worked for destroyed by such accusations.

    As the father of a young daughter, it saddens me to think that is the future we’re creating for her.

    • Indeed, I know a few this side of the pond the same way. It’s usually not mentioned for obvious reasons. One of ours told me he also was afraid that not only the business would be destroyed, but families as well. I think him correct. It saddens me though, women have much to contribute, but have become too destructive to have around.

    • It’s a sad state of affairs and not only in employment.
      Consider the dating side. Many single men, fearing the repercussions of a false allegation, will be terrified of connecting with anyone of the opposite sex. Our neo-feminists have a very strange and vague idea of what constitutes harassment – it could be anything from a look to an off the cuff comment to an accidental brush of the arm. You may laugh or think I’m over-exaggerating but this is certainly the way it’s going. Women are just as interested in meeting someone as men are. It’s going to get a lot more isolated for both sexes.

  49. As with everything in this world follow the money and who benefits. The elites have an uncontrollable need to keep us in the EU and will use any and every means available. I have never thought that we will be allowed to leave without one hell of a fight that might really get nasty. Too many people stand to lose too much.
    Mrs May is a remainer and always was. Plan B if you like. The government is expendable if the main purpose is to stay in the EU . Nothing else matters to the likes of Blair and Soubry.
    It is like the absurd plotting against the US President for being in collusion with Russia. Crazy but effective . Destabalize our government and anything is possible . Like staying in the EU.
    We need somebody with the resolve of Oliver Cromwell and the ruthlessness to put an end to the prattling of our media and politicians.Time to give the ruling elites a final notice. Respect us or pay a price.

  50. The Jane Merrick quote is revealing. ‘As a political journalist, I went out for lunch with MPs as often as three times a week. It was part of the job. But, over the hundreds of these encounters over my 14 years in the lobby….’
    So this is what being ‘a political journalist’ involves. They are probably paid more than the £73,000 that is the pay of an MP. The MP is on duty and under pressure round the clock. The political journalist has a few conversations a day and gets lunches on expenses, and the only skill required is to write readably. What is written doesn’t have to be true – it can be and often is mainly speculation. Yet despite this money for old rope, Ms Merrick appears to be able to command attention and respect.
    We would be better off if she left Westminster and reported some real news, but only the poorly-paid young journalists have to do that.

Comments are closed.