What’s wrong with a perversion, depravity and vice?

It’s the little things that make life worth living.

*snigger* his surname is Coxall

Duh-huh-huh-huh-huh… he said ‘Coxall’.

Okay, that’s enough of the Beavis and Butthead’s for this post.

BTW, If this twat was genuinely expelled from the Tory Party then all I can say is…

…well done.

Shorter Coxall: “First!”

Heterosexualists! No need to feel left out. He wants to ban you from doing dirty things with your bot-bots too.

Nanny would not approve.

@4:

A gentleman never comes first. Fortunately I am neither.

He wants to ban you from doing dirty things with your bot-bots too.

That’ll lose him the Catholic vote – they’ve got few enough forms of contraception as it is without banning the most popular.

Leave aside the guy’s disgusting bigotry. I think we should bring back hanging for misuse of exclamation marks, and try him for crimes against punctuation.

Click through to his blog and you get:

“Content Warning
Some readers of this blog have contacted Google because they believe this blog’s content is objectionable.”

I got there in the end. They were right.

@8:

I think he’s using the exclamation mark as a convenient annotation for stuff he’s stating on the basis of nothing whatsoever.

Nobody is born gay!

Clouds are made of bacon!

I am a likable human!

“Matthew’s own blog is heavy with pro homosexual pervert content: see here, here and here…”

I clicked on all those links and was severely disappointed.

7 – Actually the Catholics are agin it too. Hence the Bulgarian heresy (since shortened to ‘buggery’).

The best that can be said, is he’ll be contributing 500 quid to the cost of the election. Wonder if he’ll shake hands with the tory at the count?

12

As with any situation, we have to separate the words of the elite and the actions of the many.

You should have a look at some of the loonies the Tories are putting up…

What a hilarious loon! Can we get him on Question Time?

You can prove anything with facts.

@12 – Well yes, officially the Catholic Church is agin it…

…in practice, my understanding is there are a lot of Bulgarian Heretics in the Catholic Church.

18 – Is this a good moment to say that my wife was at a convent school? But then, we’ve just had a baby so we must be doing it wrong.

“less than 1% of paedophiles were homosexual, in the sense of exhibiting a sexual attraction to post-pubescent males”

And the figures for the more likely sense of exhibiting a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent males ?

20 – yes that sentence does rather read as “less than 1% of paedophiles were homosexual, in the sense of not actually being paedophiles”.

‘He wants to ban you from doing dirty things with your bot-bots too.’

Struggling to think of clean things to do with mine, tbh. There’s a reason that it is where it is.

Blowing a trumpet maybe?

Most paedophiles are unconcerned with the gender of their victims. The distinction is between paedophiles and paedophiles who are also homosexual. Since most paedophiles don’t distinguish between male and female victims, the only reasonable basis for concluding that someone is actually homosexual is that they’re also attracted to post-pubescent males. Someone who is not attracted to post-pubescent males is not homosexual.

And the figures for the more likely sense of exhibiting a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent males ?

Are of no relevance as those are paedophiles not homosexuals and the studies found very little crossover between the two groups.

In fact, what was found was that there was much less of a crossover between paedophiles who fixated on boys and homosexuals than there was between paedophiles who fixated on girls and heterosexuals.

“British public took the view that homosexuality is a way of life that society should accept”.

That doesn’t surprise me but it’s hardly the same as saying they’d like to be democratically represented by one. I accept vegetarians and cyclists but I wouldn’t want my MP to be one.

“I accept vegetarians and cyclists but I wouldn’t want my MP to be one.”

Out of interest, why?

“he failed to adequately allow for the prevalence of situational homosexuality and overestimated the actual prevalence of homosexuality as a result”

You mean he lumped the gays and the bis in together? After all, “situational homosexuality” does tend to be one of those terms used by people who think that bisexuals can’t make up their mind, and sexuality is a binary state. I find it interesting to see it used in a post about bigotry…

@ 26 Because as a car driving omnivore I don’t believe they would represent my interests. Bristol city council has a cyclist in charge of transport and he’s basically wrecked the roads for any other kind of user.

‘@ 26 Because as a car driving omnivore I don’t believe they would represent my interests. Bristol city council has a cyclist in charge of transport and he’s basically wrecked the roads for any other kind of user.’

By that reasoning Black people should only vote for Black candidates, women should only vote for female candidates, gay people should only vote for homosexual candidates, etc…

You mean he lumped the gays and the bis in together?

Not, not really..

i can see where you’re coming from here.

The term ’situational homosexuality’ was commonly used in the manner you describe back in the days when many psychologists subscribed to binary models of human sexuality and it did go out of fashion when the binary model was superseded by the continuum model.

However, the term is making something of a come back these days, albeit with a rather different and more precise meaning, as psychologists move past the continuum model toward behavioural models of human sexuality in which gender preferences are one component amongst many rather than being seen as the primary characteristic by which human sexuality is defined.

Situational does genuinely mean situational, i.e. homosexuality within a specific situational context as a concomitant/adjunct to other specific sexual behaviours while someone who has general attraction to both genders is bisexual.

For the record, Richard Carvath has never been a member of the Conservative Party. He applied to join in 2008 and his membership request was refused.

@ 29. I would vote for a black, gay car driver, rather than a white, straight cyclist. The attributes you list are not choices, being a vegetarian/cyclist is a choice.

How often do you have to ride a bike before you are defined as a ‘cyclist’? Is owning one enough?

You appear to be arguing against yourself Matt Munro. Why would you use cyclists and vegetarians as your examples and then later say they are not good examples because people choose to be them?

As a concious choice, being a cyclist or a vegetarian is indicative of a world view (with which I disagree) in a way that being black, or gay is not. You can be a black conservatives or a gay liberal, but I’ve yet to meet a vegetarian who would desctibe themself as anything other than liberal.

@33 Not sure. I own a (mountain) bike but I wouldn’t define myself as a cyclist.

Thank for that, Iain – have amended the post to reflect your update.

“As a concious choice, being a cyclist or a vegetarian is indicative of a world view (with which I disagree) in a way that being black, or gay is not. You can be a black conservatives or a gay liberal, but I’ve yet to meet a vegetarian who would desctibe themself as anything other than liberal.”

Hitler?

@ 38 fair enough. Like I said, I’ve yet to meet one…………….

I dispute Iain Lindley’s above statement. I have in my possession the membership card which the Conservative Party issued to me in 2008.

‘How often do you have to ride a bike before you are defined as a ‘cyclist’? Is owning one enough?’

I’m not sure if I’m a bi-cyclist or if it’s just situational.

As a gay man, may I take this opportunity to say that I’ve looked at Richard’s video on Youtube and have concluded that he’s quite sexy. If he wants my number…..

I dispute Iain Lindley’s above statement.

Noted.

Do you dispute Unity’s statement that you are “a raging, wilfully ignorant, bigot”?

Most paedophiles are unconcerned with the gender of their victims.

Do you have a link for that Dunc?

Jennie @27: I’ve always understood the “situational homosexual” definition to describe the conduct of men and women when the sexes are separated. That when people are incarcerated or in a single sex service or live in a remote region, they are more likely to indulge in recreational homosexuality and revert to heterosexuality when their social climate changes.

And when Kinsey was researching his reports, single sex environments were not only more numerous than today, but some populations (eg armed services) were huge. Thus a 10% homosexual population by the Kinsey standard (ie people who had indulged in recreational sex with a member of the same sex at that time) is probably an underestimate. Of course, that is very different from saying that 10% of the population is gay.

It would be interesting to see whether people who were in their teens and twenties in the second world war perceive homosexuality differently from slightly younger people.

I was intrigued by Unity’s international stats on the question “that homosexuality is a way of life that society should accept”. The survey figures don’t quite match up with real world tolerance (eg prevalence of gay bars or acceptance of two men embracing in public). Simple questions receive simple responses, particularly when the subjects want to appear liberal. You need more probing questions to determine which nation is the most tolerant to homosexuality, bisexuality and transgenderism.

Actually, the most interesting thing about this story has been missed.

Following his blog post on the Tory candidate, Carvath received a letter from a PC (that’s Police Constable) from Greater Manchester Police.

A reader of your article has made a complaint that the content is offensive and feels strongly enough to report this matter to the police. He wishes for you to be advised over the potential alarm and distress caused by your article. Whilst not taking this at face value and understanding the meaning of language and how it can be misinterpreted, it could be argued that the context of the comments made could be construed to be borderline criminal.

At this stage I feel it would be advisable for you to remove this from your blog thereby preventing misinterpretation.

My advice to you is to stop being a social engineer trying to suppress free speech and get on with genuine police work.

It is not a crime to criticise homosexuality and nor is it a crime to refer to a public gay political activist as a homosexual pervert.

Quite right. Freedom of speech is paramount. It’s an absolute right.

Even if it were a crime I’m a British evangelical Christian so nothing and nobody is going to tell me what I can and can’t say in my own country. As a Christian I speak and act out of love – not hate – so my motive for referring to homosexuality as a perversion is love.

Bang him up quick, the tosser.

“I’ve yet to meet a vegetarian who would desctibe themself as anything other than liberal.”

Right! Zat’s it! You’re going on zer list!

“As a Christian I speak and act out of love”

Yup. Love. Lashings of lovely love. That’s certainly the impression you get from reading this wanker’s blog.

Bonus! Jesus Thinks You’re a Jerk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQcE2dq3YD0

Larry,

Yes!

Furthermore I find the cowardice of ‘Unity’ in making such remarks about a named person from behind the veil of anonymity rather disgusting (but sadly such atrocious behaviour is commonplace with political bloggers).

@46 Pagar. The continuous italics confused me, because I can’t follow Carvath from the copper without referring to Carvath’s blog. Nor can I determine whether your support was ironic.

Whatever. This should not be a serious freedom of speech issue, but if the coppers are telling Carvath to shut up, the coppers should be told to piss off. Carvath is an offensive idiot, but until he provokes or causes harm, that is his liberty.

@47 Don’t tell him Pike

Disgusting tosser indeed. Yet so is the police constable in question, not only for demanding the removal of that is offensive but also using weasel words to put the frighteners on an individual even when it is unclear if has broken any particular law

@ 50 The continuous italics confused me

Yeah messed it up. Bring the edit function, back, Sunny, even if it means the twitters don’t count in your stats.

Two points.

1) GMP should have better things to do with their time than threaten bloggers. If they haven’t they should be in line for some cutbacks.

2) I should have better things to do with my time than defend tossers like Carvaths right to free speech.

Tosser.

It’s quite amusing this, watching you guys defend his right to free speech whilst simulatneously calling him a tosser.

Matt Munro: That’s sort of the point of free speech.

He’s a bigot/tosser/deeply uneducated/etc (delete as applicable), we call him out on that but we don’t ask for his views to be banned.

[merecat]Simples.[/merecat]

Familiar with the concept of free speech beleive it or not. Still funny.

Fair enough, just used to arguing with people on the internet…

Cheers left outside. I find it really amusing when matt munro attempts logic.

I just find Matt Munro amusing.

He should convert to Islam, then the Left would love him (and he could raise his contempt of gays to wanting to stone them to death)

http://www.hizb.org.uk/

pagar @44:

Do you have a link for that Dunc?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2699/is_0005/ai_2699000576/

“Preference for children as sex partners may not be exclusive, and more often than not, pedophiles have no gender preference in prepubescent children.”

http://www.springerlink.com/content/m4336n78466357t2/

“Pedophiles differentiated erotically between females and males less than males who erotically preferred physically mature partners.”

It’s a tough call being an Independent though – we’ve got a chap who’s wittering about 4 reservoirs rather than anything substantial. Hmm.. it does kinda seem that the party machines lock up many choices so shrill nutters or marginal interests are all that’s left.

It will be interesting watching the candidates for elected mayors if any council fails to stich up the PH&I Act (2007) which comes into play in April.

Old Holborn? Old bollocks, more like.