Ymx wrote: ↑Fri Jul 14, 2023 9:38 am
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 14, 2023 5:48 am
Openside wrote: ↑Thu Jul 13, 2023 6:53 pm
It sleazy behaviour whatever, I would be pretty disgusted if one of my mates was up to that behind his wife’s back.
As per the Jonathan Pie link, what business is it of yours? My father always used to say to me a kid "I don't give a sh*t what consenting adults do as long as it doesn't have a detrimental impact upon society".
You are within your rights to choose your friends in such a scenario but are way beyond the pale if you think it gives you the right to try and assist in destroying his life.
I think that’s a hell of a difference if you are a significant public figure. They will be held to a higher level of account.
Much like Boris and his cake.
None of us know to what extent this was behind his wife's back. Some couples swing, some couples look at porn together and so on. Until we hear otherwise, we don't know and you're inventing any notion of infidelity.
Even if it turns out to be the case, infidelity is not a fireable offence, it is not a criminal offence. It may be distasteful, but it is an entirely private matter. The only sphere in which is may matter is when one's position is reliant on apparent honesty and where it may confirm a pattern of mendacity a la our ex-PM the Bumblecunt.
You keep saying a newsreader is a significant public figure and I struggle to understand why. He might be more recognisable than my post-man, but he is just doing a job and he was perfectly capable of doing that job while this was going on in the background unbeknownst to anyone.
He doesn't have any particular access of privileged information in which the potential for him to be blackmailed over his extracurriculars may matter, for example.
A lot of the critique from those of you who lean right reeks of a heady mixture of general anti-BBC sentiment and puritanical moral panic.