| I think I'm right in saying that 12:42 - Apr 29 with 2633 views | factual_blue |
boris's latest child (which is I think his second - or possibly third - born out of wedlock) is the first illegitimate child fathered by an incumbent Prime Minister so far as I can establish, although those 18th century toffs were at it like knives, so one can't be certain. |  |
| |  |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:50 - Apr 29 with 2240 views | bournemouthblue |
illegitimate is probably an old fashioned way of looking at it now, even if that might be technically the right description
Virtually all our Prime Ministers are married and in a stable relationship, which I suppose is often why they have been in a position to become their party leader
Obviously there's a lot wrong with Boris which we all know about but ironically I suppose, given his background of privilege and establishment, he has a much more modern relationship which is more on par with a lot of Brits around the country |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:53 - Apr 29 with 2232 views | SouthBucksBlue |
Why are the terms ‘illegitimate’ and ‘out of wedlock’ of any relevance whatsoever in this day and age? |  | | |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:55 - Apr 29 with 2217 views | uefacup81 |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:53 - Apr 29 by SouthBucksBlue |
Why are the terms ‘illegitimate’ and ‘out of wedlock’ of any relevance whatsoever in this day and age? |
Because it means we can legitimately call it "Boris Johnson's b@stard child"? |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:56 - Apr 29 with 2218 views | itfcjoe |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:50 - Apr 29 by bournemouthblue |
illegitimate is probably an old fashioned way of looking at it now, even if that might be technically the right description
Virtually all our Prime Ministers are married and in a stable relationship, which I suppose is often why they have been in a position to become their party leader
Obviously there's a lot wrong with Boris which we all know about but ironically I suppose, given his background of privilege and establishment, he has a much more modern relationship which is more on par with a lot of Brits around the country |
His private life is an absolute mess - one of the things the Sunday Times was saying is that he was having to finalise his divorce, and break news his new partner was (we now find out 7 monhts...!) pregnant to his previous wife and kids and he was engaged.
Plus he has other children he doesn't speak to by all accounts, and one he denies the existence of. That stuff catches up with you, and did at a very inopportune time |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:58 - Apr 29 with 2195 views | WeWereZombies |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:55 - Apr 29 by uefacup81 |
Because it means we can legitimately call it "Boris Johnson's b@stard child"? |
So that makes Johnson a b@stard dad, doesn't it? Oh no, it needs an apostrophe for that to be the case. |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:19 - Apr 29 with 2133 views | Ftnfwest |
Well, I wouldn’t worry, this is just part of ‘culture’ in certain parts of society |  | | |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:36 - Apr 29 with 2107 views | factual_blue |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:53 - Apr 29 by SouthBucksBlue |
Why are the terms ‘illegitimate’ and ‘out of wedlock’ of any relevance whatsoever in this day and age? |
In law, boris's latest child is illegitimate.
No two ways about it. | |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 14:00 - Apr 29 with 2068 views | SouthBucksBlue |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:36 - Apr 29 by factual_blue |
In law, boris's latest child is illegitimate.
No two ways about it. |
So what? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| I think I'm right in saying that on 18:08 - Apr 29 with 1999 views | J2BLUE |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:36 - Apr 29 by factual_blue |
In law, boris's latest child is illegitimate.
No two ways about it. |
It's about as relevant in 2020 as the law saying you can't enter the houses of parliament wearing a suit of armour. |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 19:46 - Apr 29 with 1929 views | solemio |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:36 - Apr 29 by factual_blue |
In law, boris's latest child is illegitimate.
No two ways about it. |
There are no illegitimate children, but many illegitimate parents.
That is a truth not enshrined in law. | | | |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 20:38 - Apr 29 with 1877 views | hype313 |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:36 - Apr 29 by factual_blue |
In law, boris's latest child is illegitimate.
No two ways about it. |
Careful, you're starting to sound like Rees-Mogg. |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 21:35 - Apr 29 with 1840 views | Churchman |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:56 - Apr 29 by itfcjoe |
His private life is an absolute mess - one of the things the Sunday Times was saying is that he was having to finalise his divorce, and break news his new partner was (we now find out 7 monhts...!) pregnant to his previous wife and kids and he was engaged.
Plus he has other children he doesn't speak to by all accounts, and one he denies the existence of. That stuff catches up with you, and did at a very inopportune time |
I couldn’t care a less what his personal life is like. Whatever, as long as it’s not illegal. It’s none of anyone’s business, especially in the 21st century. It’s what he does in his job as PM is all that I’m worried about, especially his Governments’ late and inadequate response to the pandemic.
I doubt that many posters’ on here personal life would stand much scrutiny, including mine. I also don’t remember anyone on here bringing up Jeremy Corbyn’ three marriages and other relationships and rightly so. [Post edited 29 Apr 2020 21:46]
|  | | |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 22:59 - Apr 29 with 1764 views | The_Last_Baron |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 12:50 - Apr 29 by bournemouthblue |
illegitimate is probably an old fashioned way of looking at it now, even if that might be technically the right description
Virtually all our Prime Ministers are married and in a stable relationship, which I suppose is often why they have been in a position to become their party leader
Obviously there's a lot wrong with Boris which we all know about but ironically I suppose, given his background of privilege and establishment, he has a much more modern relationship which is more on par with a lot of Brits around the country |
It's good to finally have a Prime Minister who is a proper lad who loves the ladies.
Congratulations Boris and Carrie. A great job. |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 23:24 - Apr 29 with 1754 views | SpruceMoose |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 22:59 - Apr 29 by The_Last_Baron |
It's good to finally have a Prime Minister who is a proper lad who loves the ladies.
Congratulations Boris and Carrie. A great job. |
You know, when you're not making moronic trolling posts like this one, you're not so much of a wänker. Only just mind you. |  |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 00:58 - Apr 30 with 1725 views | jeera |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 22:59 - Apr 29 by The_Last_Baron |
It's good to finally have a Prime Minister who is a proper lad who loves the ladies.
Congratulations Boris and Carrie. A great job. |
You make yourself look stupid with this crap.
Stick to the sensible stuff and drop the juvenile attempts to troll.
You're not a child. |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 01:14 - Apr 30 with 1717 views | jeera |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 13:19 - Apr 29 by Ftnfwest |
Well, I wouldn’t worry, this is just part of ‘culture’ in certain parts of society |
Ooh, what certain parts of society? | |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 01:19 - Apr 30 with 1713 views | jeera |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 21:35 - Apr 29 by Churchman |
I couldn’t care a less what his personal life is like. Whatever, as long as it’s not illegal. It’s none of anyone’s business, especially in the 21st century. It’s what he does in his job as PM is all that I’m worried about, especially his Governments’ late and inadequate response to the pandemic.
I doubt that many posters’ on here personal life would stand much scrutiny, including mine. I also don’t remember anyone on here bringing up Jeremy Corbyn’ three marriages and other relationships and rightly so. [Post edited 29 Apr 2020 21:46]
|
I think it would be nice if we had someone in charge of the country who wasn't a lying philanderer, regardless of their political persuasion, wouldn't you?
Some sort of stability at the top might be at least a good start as far as role models go.
Especially when there's been many a post complaining about a lack of fatherly role models in society - absent fathers et al - from a section of the population.
Been mentioned on here many times indeed in fact. | |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 08:15 - Apr 30 with 1619 views | TractorWood |
About half of all births in the UK are to unwed parents. The OP doesn't offend me but I think it easily could offend others.
Probably in bad taste.
From a legal perspective we ratified the EU law on equality on this in the early 80's so not sure what you mean by reference to 'in law'. Are you referring to potential ascension to the throne? That's the only thing potentially possible but not sure BoJo is blue blooded. |  |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 08:44 - Apr 30 with 1563 views | itfcjoe |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 21:35 - Apr 29 by Churchman |
I couldn’t care a less what his personal life is like. Whatever, as long as it’s not illegal. It’s none of anyone’s business, especially in the 21st century. It’s what he does in his job as PM is all that I’m worried about, especially his Governments’ late and inadequate response to the pandemic.
I doubt that many posters’ on here personal life would stand much scrutiny, including mine. I also don’t remember anyone on here bringing up Jeremy Corbyn’ three marriages and other relationships and rightly so. [Post edited 29 Apr 2020 21:46]
|
I think your personal life will say a lot about someone and how much you can trust them, and of course not everyone's is perfect.
But even in 'real life' if I have a mate who is willing to cheat on wife and family, and then not do the decent thing by them I lose a lot of respect and time I have for them - especially when it comes to kids. Without trying to claim to be holier than thou there are previous friends I now no longer really speak to because of some of their actions in private life which makes me think less about them as a person - not just in a way of stopping point blank but just having less time for them until it happens naturally.
I struggle to understand how, especially in the US with Trump, there are some very conservative people who are your married with 2.4 children lot, who are still likely anti-gay marriage, etc can stomach a PM or President who clearly has very loose morals in their private life with regards to women | |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 09:21 - Apr 30 with 1532 views | hampstead_blue |
Really?
I think some posters will find a turd in anything which isn't left wing.
They are engaged. It's hardly a Boris Becker knee trembler in a cupboard. |  |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 09:27 - Apr 30 with 1528 views | Churchman |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 08:44 - Apr 30 by itfcjoe |
I think your personal life will say a lot about someone and how much you can trust them, and of course not everyone's is perfect.
But even in 'real life' if I have a mate who is willing to cheat on wife and family, and then not do the decent thing by them I lose a lot of respect and time I have for them - especially when it comes to kids. Without trying to claim to be holier than thou there are previous friends I now no longer really speak to because of some of their actions in private life which makes me think less about them as a person - not just in a way of stopping point blank but just having less time for them until it happens naturally.
I struggle to understand how, especially in the US with Trump, there are some very conservative people who are your married with 2.4 children lot, who are still likely anti-gay marriage, etc can stomach a PM or President who clearly has very loose morals in their private life with regards to women |
In my view, everyone’s personal life is theirs alone. I couldn’t care a less if Megan has been with the Household Cavalry or Boris with every woman in his constituency. If Jeremy has cheated or not, had three wives and Diane Abbott and a donkey in the field, I don’t care - as long as the people they’ve been with along with the donkey are consenting and it’s legal. If you were to take a ‘private life matters’ line on this then Horatio Nelson would never have been at Trafalgar. It was the public scandal of the day. There are many others whose private lives throughout history was chaotic and history would be very different if they’d have been binned out. For me, private and public lives are very different things. Same with Trump. His private life is just that. The orange idiot does plenty in his public life to condemn him.
As I implied in my previous post, I am nobody’s judge and certainly no angel. Certain close friends of mine have toddled down to the red light district on golf tours while holding a happy domestic relationship. Not for me but that’s their affair. Others have done the most extraordinary things with their private life. Again, not for me but they’re still friends. I had a situation many years ago when I was working in the banking world where a good friend stole a lot of money from my employers. As his friend I would have also been investigated. I had nothing to hide, but he’d broken my trust and is no longer a friend.
If they fiddle their expenses, they should be out even if it’s a fiver. If they tell lies or deliberately mislead, bully people in the workplace, commit a crime, they should be out.
Just my view and I suppose frustration at the fascination there is in this world for others private lives. [Post edited 30 Apr 2020 16:35]
| | | |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 09:39 - Apr 30 with 1518 views | itfcjoe |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 09:27 - Apr 30 by Churchman |
In my view, everyone’s personal life is theirs alone. I couldn’t care a less if Megan has been with the Household Cavalry or Boris with every woman in his constituency. If Jeremy has cheated or not, had three wives and Diane Abbott and a donkey in the field, I don’t care - as long as the people they’ve been with along with the donkey are consenting and it’s legal. If you were to take a ‘private life matters’ line on this then Horatio Nelson would never have been at Trafalgar. It was the public scandal of the day. There are many others whose private lives throughout history was chaotic and history would be very different if they’d have been binned out. For me, private and public lives are very different things. Same with Trump. His private life is just that. The orange idiot does plenty in his public life to condemn him.
As I implied in my previous post, I am nobody’s judge and certainly no angel. Certain close friends of mine have toddled down to the red light district on golf tours while holding a happy domestic relationship. Not for me but that’s their affair. Others have done the most extraordinary things with their private life. Again, not for me but they’re still friends. I had a situation many years ago when I was working in the banking world where a good friend stole a lot of money from my employers. As his friend I would have also been investigated. I had nothing to hide, but he’d broken my trust and is no longer a friend.
If they fiddle their expenses, they should be out even if it’s a fiver. If they tell lies or deliberately mislead, bully people in the workplace, commit a crime, they should be out.
Just my view and I suppose frustration at the fascination there is in this world for others private lives. [Post edited 30 Apr 2020 16:35]
|
It's not just 'their' private life is it though, it affects their friends and family. In the same way your mate that nicked from his employer tucked you up, people with loose morals are happy to do that and worse to people they care about in their family.
Like I said, it's not about being holier than thou, things happen and it's how you react to them that gives the measure of the man, or woman.......but if the boot was on the other foot and a woman had 6 kids with 4 different men then she wouldn't be seen as favourly as Boris gets away with.
With regards to fiddling expenses, what about fiddling it so your latest squeeze (Jennifer Arcuri) can get money and opportunity out of the public pot? His conduct with women seems to be a massive weakness, and those things come back to bite | |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 11:00 - Apr 30 with 1492 views | Churchman |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 09:39 - Apr 30 by itfcjoe |
It's not just 'their' private life is it though, it affects their friends and family. In the same way your mate that nicked from his employer tucked you up, people with loose morals are happy to do that and worse to people they care about in their family.
Like I said, it's not about being holier than thou, things happen and it's how you react to them that gives the measure of the man, or woman.......but if the boot was on the other foot and a woman had 6 kids with 4 different men then she wouldn't be seen as favourly as Boris gets away with.
With regards to fiddling expenses, what about fiddling it so your latest squeeze (Jennifer Arcuri) can get money and opportunity out of the public pot? His conduct with women seems to be a massive weakness, and those things come back to bite |
Any form of corruption is not on for me. Neither is any form of theft including MPs taking money for living in London and using it for home improvements etc. Using influence to gain in any form in that way isn’t good. That includes contracts for party donations, invitation of Cameron’s Cabinet to dinner at BT Martlesham swiftly followed by a change of heart and planning permission for 4000 new houses on the land that was formerly the airfield. Funding an influence by Trade Unions are included in this and I say that as a PCS member.
Back to the point, I don’t think anyone remembers Benjamin Franklin’s chaotic personal life or Einstein’s come to that. Picasso, Hemingway and the Pre-Raphaelites it was virtually a badge of honour. Clinton’s fun and games on the Oval Office floor will always make me laugh, but he was a better President than corrupt Nixon, weak George Bush Snr or utterly useless Carter and that’s how he’ll be remembered.
Women being judged differently is a completely different issue for me. That is sexism which like most other ‘isms’ is totally unacceptable.
I stand by my view that Boris’ personal life is just that, as is Starmer’s, Corbyn’s, Jimmy Krankie’s and anyone else in public life. I’ll judge him on what he does as PM and that alone, just as would anyone else. | | | |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 11:06 - Apr 30 with 1487 views | itfcjoe |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 11:00 - Apr 30 by Churchman |
Any form of corruption is not on for me. Neither is any form of theft including MPs taking money for living in London and using it for home improvements etc. Using influence to gain in any form in that way isn’t good. That includes contracts for party donations, invitation of Cameron’s Cabinet to dinner at BT Martlesham swiftly followed by a change of heart and planning permission for 4000 new houses on the land that was formerly the airfield. Funding an influence by Trade Unions are included in this and I say that as a PCS member.
Back to the point, I don’t think anyone remembers Benjamin Franklin’s chaotic personal life or Einstein’s come to that. Picasso, Hemingway and the Pre-Raphaelites it was virtually a badge of honour. Clinton’s fun and games on the Oval Office floor will always make me laugh, but he was a better President than corrupt Nixon, weak George Bush Snr or utterly useless Carter and that’s how he’ll be remembered.
Women being judged differently is a completely different issue for me. That is sexism which like most other ‘isms’ is totally unacceptable.
I stand by my view that Boris’ personal life is just that, as is Starmer’s, Corbyn’s, Jimmy Krankie’s and anyone else in public life. I’ll judge him on what he does as PM and that alone, just as would anyone else. |
It just seems a strange double standard when they do impose on it - part of the thrust of the Sunday Times Investigation was that Bori was away sorting this when he should have been in Whitehall, Bill Clinton's 'fun and games' nearly ended his Presidency.
Private doesn't stay private in the public eye in that respect - and there is a difference between doing what you want to do in your own life, and then knowing that that info is now coming back to hurt you and you have to spend time crisis managing it and taking you away from what you should be doing. They are all people, we all know how things going on in personal live can't just be left at the door when they begin to effect your work life. | |
| |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 11:46 - Apr 30 with 1459 views | Churchman |
| I think I'm right in saying that on 11:06 - Apr 30 by itfcjoe |
It just seems a strange double standard when they do impose on it - part of the thrust of the Sunday Times Investigation was that Bori was away sorting this when he should have been in Whitehall, Bill Clinton's 'fun and games' nearly ended his Presidency.
Private doesn't stay private in the public eye in that respect - and there is a difference between doing what you want to do in your own life, and then knowing that that info is now coming back to hurt you and you have to spend time crisis managing it and taking you away from what you should be doing. They are all people, we all know how things going on in personal live can't just be left at the door when they begin to effect your work life. |
I haven’t read the article so I don’t know what was the truth of it and what was alleged. I am very anti the press at the moment as much of what they write is a distortion at best. If you are saying it was proven that he lied about doing his ‘day job’ when he was doing private stuff then he should be held to account for it. I don’t know how BJ works but I do know from people who worked in PMs Private Office that Blair, Brown Cameron and May worked extraordinary hours. I doubt it’s all that different for BJ whether he likes it or not.
As for Clinton, many parts of America are far more conservative (in their views) and inward looking than the UK, in my limited experience, but Clinton did survive when he was called to account in the 90s - a long time ago now. He is widely considered one of the better Presidents and is probably the best of my lifetime.
I happen to think personal life can and should be left at the door. For me, it’s simply none of anyone else’s business whether it’s a nobody like me, a celeb or a politician. I don’t rate Johnson anymore than I did Corbyn or May (and of the three I knew a lot about how she worked), but their private lives?: their problem and their privacy should be respected. If it affects what you do in the workplace, that’s a different matter. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
