London SE1 community website

Our MP??

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 2 of 7
Thursday 26 January 2006 10.56am
But he didn't lie. He's not gay: he's bisexual. There is a difference.
Thursday 26 January 2006 10.57am
Most probably so, Birdie.

But all Mr Hughes seems to have done here is prove what a bad liar he is, which, following the same line of reasoning, will make him a sub-optimal candidate for party leader or prime minister.

...if you press it, they will come.
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.10am
After hearing about the "straight man" campaign my estimations went down. Didn't think he was that kind of politician. Now it gets worse (lyiing). I was a big supporter. Hey ho.
Anonymous User
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.18am
The Lady Miss Jo Jo wrote:
But he didn't lie. He's not gay: he's bisexual. There is a difference.

I think that is just fudge. Just because he has "had relationships with women" does not mean he isn't gay.

Has he actually said that he's bisexual or just inferred it? I've not seen a newspaper today - just Sky News which is, essentially, The Sun on the telly.

Perhaps he's just doubling his chances of a date on Saturday nights?
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.21am
Birdie wrote:
The Lady Miss Jo Jo wrote:
But he didn't lie. He's not gay: he's bisexual. There is a difference.

I think that is just fudge. Just because he has "had relationships with women" does not mean he isn't gay.

Has he actually said that he's bisexual or just inferred it? I've not seen a newspaper today - just Sky News which is, essentially, The Sun on the telly.

Perhaps he's just doubling his chances of a date on Saturday nights?

But equally, just because he's "had relationships with men" does not mean he is gay.

He has said he's had relationships with men and women.
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.26am
The Lady Miss Jo Jo wrote:
But he didn't lie. He's not gay: he's bisexual. There is a difference.

But only a politician would think to find that difference in answer to that question.

...if you press it, they will come.
Anonymous User
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.32am
The Lady Miss Jo Jo wrote:

But equally, just because he's "had relationships with men" does not mean he is gay.

He has said he's had relationships with men and women.

A good point well made. Doesn't detract from the fact that he was sold to the constituency originally as a straight man does it?

I don't want to come across as arguing against him - I don't care who he sleeps with & I think he is a good MP.
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.37am
Quite a lot of posters are concentrating on whether or not he lied, and whether or not that affects your support for him.

This depresses me somewhat. Simon Hughes is an outstanding MP, and would make an excellent leader of the Lib Dems. As with any member of the public, he has his own (private) life to which he is entitled. Unlike most members of the public, he has to appeal to a broad cross-section of the public to keep his job (and, indeed, to continue to serve the public). Unfortunately, a large proportion of society is either deeply offended by homosexuality, or are prejudiced enough to switch their votes from someone who admits to being gay.

So, sad though it is, people in the public eye that are either gay, or have had homosexual relationships in the past, have to walk a delicate tightrope of concealing their sexuality in order that society doesn't become prejudiced against them. There are many examples, from Ron Davies through to Mark Oaten via Michael Portillo (we could extend this line to TV "slebs", eg. Michael Barrymore).

Simon Hughes deserves the support of those who believe in him as a decent politician. People shouldn't get caught up in the tittle-tattle of whether a person in the public eye has made misleading statements simply to protect privacy.
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.39am
Birdie wrote:
The Lady Miss Jo Jo wrote:

But equally, just because he's "had relationships with men" does not mean he is gay.

He has said he's had relationships with men and women.

A good point well made. Doesn't detract from the fact that he was sold to the constituency originally as a straight man does it?

I don't want to come across as arguing against him - I don't care who he sleeps with & I think he is a good MP.

You're right, that campaign was bad. But, it was over 20 years ago, he's since proved himself to be an excellent MP and a decent bloke, he has apologised to Peter Tatchell, and Peter Tatchell has said he thinks Simon's the best candidate for leadership of the party.

Anyway, I'm sure you and I agree on this, Birdie. ; )
Thursday 26 January 2006 11.54am
Martin,

I've read, and re-read your, post.

You are his PR and I claim my five pounds :)

I'm a party supporter. Things are going from bad to worse.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 2 of 7

To post a message, please log in or register..
We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions