Cleverly

[whirlingdevonish]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67813689
I don't think I've ever been angrier at a politician. And that is saying something in this political climate. Surely the Home Secretary should go?

The humour or otherwise is not important. What is important and a key election issue is knwoing what a woman is, and Cleverly is right on message with that, much to the annoyance of the eating woke tofurati.

Yup, 👍
If you say so.

Again, your posts don’t make any sense but you’re boring me now.

Which part are you finding confusing?

It has been clear for months that the key issue effecting everyone is whether or not they know what a woman is. Sunak and Cleverly do, Starmer and Cooper don't. Many, many people will vote accordingly.

Sadly this is true.

Yep, the Tories know what a woman is alright. They are the ones who should not bother with further education, should churn out babies and should be sedated so that they don't realise their husbands are misogynistic idiots.

That part of the Tories defence of James Cleverly is that these comments were "off the record" and journalists won't supposed to tell us about them just makes me angrier.

As if a Home Secretary joking about controlling women by drugging them is ok because it happened behind closed doors!

It's debatable how far a function at Downing Street is private tbh.

Its absolutely disgusting and an awful comment to make.the simple fact is women and girls don't feel safe this is predominantly due to male behaviour and I strongly believe as men we have a moral duty to change that.however comments like this will do nothing to make woman and girls feel safe.

He needs to go it's completely unacceptable even banter it's shocking and sickening given the high number of spiking cases and contuined harassment of women and girls.After Sarah everad and the harrowing accounts on everyone's invited I thought me may finally have turned a corner.sadly not!

Would I lie to you?

Absolutely. It is not as if he was down the pub with his mates or in a private home.

Yep. It was full of political journalists.
Not private at all!

Even less private than a Met Police officers rape "banter" WhatsApp group.

Hmm let me think about that one. Are you a Tory government minister?

How rude!

🤔😁😂

I have been called all manner of things on here, including an American Republican communist, but your insult is by far the most hurtful.

Oh I missed that one!

The Tories know what a woman is and for...

Yes, we know. They (or at least their Home Secretary) have made it abundantly clear that a woman is for drugging and raping.

It's not ironic. He don't even know what ironic means.

And his words are beyond shocking. How can girls and women trust him now? He should be sacked.

Ok, two things

1. if you’re are the person literally in charge of spearheading the protection of women in law, at the time where a law is being proposed to criminalise spiking as a specific issue within VAWG, then this is obviously messed up and wrong, right?
2. if the above is true, then “knowing what a women is” doesn’t mean jack, because this man is not an ally to women. Any women.

you can be gender critical to the extreme, but if you think Cleverly deserves to stay in role after this then your gender critical views are blinding you to overt and obvious misogyny. I genuinely can’t understand that viewpoint.

We can all disagree about various aspects of women’s rights, trans rights, safeguarding, etc. that’s a valid and live debate

but surely a man who has show such obvious contempt and disregard for all women’s safety can’t get a free pass just cos he agrees with you on the definition of a woman? Really??

It's all gone very quiet on this story. i do hope if reemerges and does some rightful damage as we approach what may be a spring election

He is doing the rounds this morning, squirming.

Oh good.
I must admit I haven't had the radio on yet so I'll have a little search.
If my stomach can stand it...

🤮

twitter.com/BBCBreakfast/status/1742091989825290359?s=20

did anyone see Kathleen Stock's disappointing take on this? That it's "just a joke" and Helen Joyce agreeing with her.

Am raging (at the comments by Cleverly - the opposite of nominative determinism, surely? - and at Stock and Joyce)