Too much information
So, Nick Clegg, the leader of the Liberal Democrat party and an elected member of parliament, thought it was a good idea to tell GQ - the magazine that put David Cameron on the cover in September 2006, the only month I actually wished it had an airbrushed painting of an actress in her knickers* - that he's had "no more than 30" sexual partners in his life. (The interview was by Piers Morgan, who certainly knows how to get a scoop.) He didn't actually say he's slept with 30 women in his 41 years on this earth - Morgan lured him with the multiple choice: 10, 20, 30? He plumped for the latter but said it was "a lot less than that." So it could be 21. Which is only a lot because he met his "yummy wife" (quote, Jasper Gerard, Observer, October 2007) in 1991, and if she's the 21st, he must have had sexual intercourse with 20 before he met her ie. before he was 23. I know I'm adding to the chatter by blogging about it, but two questions:
1) Who cares? (I nearly wrote, who gives a fuck?)
2) What was he thinking? Politicians spend their lives avoiding questions - you'd think the leader of a party might be able to swerve this one. He refused to answer a question about whether he'd taken drugs, why not avoid embarrassment and brush the "10, 20, 30?" one off? True, he's the most anonymous leader any major political party has elected in living memory - he's less interesting than Iain Duncan-Smith - but there must be smarter ways of getting in, oh yes, every newspaper in the land. (The Guardian, ever hungry for something metatextual to put on the cover of G2, actually managed to spin four pages off the story. And can we please name and salute the thankless cub reporters credited at the end of the piece whose first job in journalism it was yesterday to go out and ask people in the street how many sexual partners they'd had: David Menon, Rachel Cranshaw, Rebecca Wainwright, Jenny Coombes.)
I'm not exactly with Anne Widdecombe, who said that Clegg's frankness added to the general moral decay of the country, as I don't believe that having sexual partners is morally decaying, but I do think it's a bit sad that he will now be known as some sort of tiger because he did what other people do. It's even sadder than when I put his name into Google just now to check the details of the story, I actually typed "Chris Huhne." It's never happened to me before etc.
*
posted by Andrew Collins @ 8:32 AM
16 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
16 Comments:
Ew, some mental images are very unwelcome.
Clearly embarrassed to be asked such a question, he gave the peer (Piers?) pressure laddish answer of more than 30, like he was at some rugby club do with the lads whom he had to impress.
It's clearly a lie, so if he's that much of a pushover when being grilled a doofus like Morgan, then his prospects in parliament don't look to rosy.
The sad thing is that the Lib Dems had a fantastic opportunity to be something different but just can't get it right. I am convinced that most people are pissed off with the two main parties and just want not only changem but refreshing change. I've always voted Labour in General Elections and tend to vote tactically at Locals. I now find that the Labour pary is not the party I wanted into power all those years ago, the Tories are, well, the Tories and the Lib Dems just have no credibility. Sadly Nick Clegg is almost as AnonoNick as I am!
I honestly don't know what do do with my precious vote and that really worries me.
AnonoNick
He's just trying to follow in Paddy Ashdown's footsteps!
I actually do care in that I really wish he hadn't answered. Not because of the answer, I would feel the same if he said one or forty. I just wonder what kind of person would degrade themselves to answer a multiple choice question reducing his sexual partners to quiz show numbers.
P.S. That GQ cover is making me feel slightly sick - come back soft porn all is forgiven.
As a card-carrying Lib Dem, I'm more than a bit annoyed with our fearless leader. Firstly, for having to resort to this kind of thing to gain exposure - it's eerily similar to Hague's '13 pints a day' story. Secondly, in the same interview, when asked whether he'd ever taken illegal drugs Clegg replied:
"what I got up to as a teenager is not relevant to my job now". The same line most politicians are obliged to trot out these days.
Does it mean 'yes, but I don't want to piss off the Mail readers'? I couldn't possibly comment.
So, alluding to shagging about a bit in my late teens: Good, and relevant to an interview about one's job. The odd doobie passed round when I was roughly the same age: Off limits.
Jon
But his new nickname "Nick Clegg-Over" is quite funny, so it all turned out worthwhile in the end.
I managed to get through the whole leadership contest without knowing which one was Nick Huhne and which one was the other guy.
Still, I think this embarrassing publicity can only help raise the profile of this guy - the guy at the top of the page. In the picture. Something to do with the LibDems.
I haven't read GQ since I was 16. I wonder if the ABC figures reveal that it's predominantly read by teenagers...
The Guardian's G2 is woeful these days. Just full of utter rubbish. I've considered giving it up, but what's the alternative?
Hang on, was this not the Grauniad's hilarious annual April Fool? Am I being dense, or is everyone else?!
Toe-curling wannabe lad stuff. Now people will remember him for this, because they surely can't remember anything else he has ever said. Vince Cable sounded promising and actually argued well, but of course he was too old, not image conscious, or 'cool' enough. Goodbye Lib Dems.
whereistom, please keep up. The Guardian's excellent April fool was that Gordon Brown had appointed Carla Bruni as style consultant to the nation. Scarily possible for someone with his cack handed attempts at populism.
Ian - oh my. I did think it was a pretty weak April Fool, even by the Guardian's standards.
Way too much information ... a bit like your mate, Herring's blog today virtually detailing his bowel movements and fart count! Good luck sitting next to him for the podcast on Friday!
Am only mildly confused by the erratic-ness of your blog, Andrew - no blogs for 4 days (29, 30, 31 March, nor 1 April) then 4 blogs in one go today -- when I finally caught up with them, I scratched my head wondering how many cyberspace days I had missed!
I think you're being harsh on him. Yes, perhaps he was foolish to answer, but then again, lots of people said he was foolish to say that he didn't believe in God too. Now there's a question that most politicans avoid like the plague because in some places that would REALLY cost them votes. I admired his honest stance on that (I happened to be listening to the interview on 5live where he said it), and I'm not about to criticize him for this because frankly I don't care. The greater error in judgment was being interviewed by Piers Morgan in the first place.
Incidentally, you might think it unlikely that he's that much of a sexual tyrannosaurus, but frankly, you have absolutely no idea if it's true or not, and only he does. He's said it now, so why scoff and assume that he's boasting or whatever. Surely a lower answer would have been more "acceptable" anyway.
And no, I'm not a lib dem voter.
ST
Post a Comment
<< Home