[Politics] Fiona Bruce. Please let this be the end.

[Nobby]

Great point, was it murder, was it manslaughter was it justifiable self defence? If you are found guilty of murder then the convention is that you are a murderer, if you murder more than one person you are described as a mass murderer, child abuse also has the same distinction, commit one act and you are a child abusing sex offender. Getting into a fight does not carry this level of condemnation. Now I do not know the circumstances of the broken nose incident, was it as Tm Bowers claims part of a sustained history of spousal abuse or as Johnson's friends have said a one off. I have to wonder if this was a same sex relationship (where the disparity in strength abiltity to fight and defend etc. where equivalent to Johnson and his wife) and this incident happened as described by the friends would there be such an outrage? Sure the attacker should be charged with assault resulting in grievous bodily harm but does a one of "red mist " incident equate to spousal/domestic abuse, personally I don't think so, its f***ed up and if I were the victim I would be out the door but to me domestic abuse confers the continual and systematic abuse of a spouse. And this is what I read into Bruce's comment.

Your comments on this thread are a bit weird if I may say so.
Someone who has had a puff is a drug user, and someone who shoplifts is a thief.
And someone who breaks his wife’s nose is a domestic abuser.
Even if you didn’t know that Johnson was a serial abuser - which he was, as is evidenced from many sources - one incident alone still makes it domestic abuse.
Surely you can see that?

 

[nickjhs]

Your comments on this thread are a bit weird if I may say so.
Someone who has had a puff is a drug user, and someone who shoplifts is a thief.
And someone who breaks his wife’s nose is a domestic abuser.
Even if you didn’t know that Johnson was a serial abuser - which he was, as is evidenced from many sources - one incident alone still makes it domestic abuse.
Surely you can see that?

No I can't to any of your comments. Nouns like drug user, thief and domestic abuser infer repetitive behavior. For example It is utterly ludicrous given the context of a person who takes a couple of puffs on a joint once in their life to label them a drug user, in fact it belittles the term. The same goes for someone who shoplifts once. And I feel the same for someone who in a single momentary loss of control thumps their partner the term domestic abuser does not fit, again it belittles the term. Like I have said on numerous occasions this does not mean there should be no consequences, there absolutley should have been.

 

[nickjhs]

You are a bloke still, it seems, trying to minimise it.

Utter bollocks, as I said he should have been charged with assault causing grievous bodily harm. I guess you chose to ignore that.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

No I can't to any of your comments. Nouns like drug user, thief and domestic abuser infer repetitive behavior. For example It is utterly ludicrous given the context of a person who takes a couple of puffs on a joint once in their life to label them a drug user, in fact it belittles the term. The same goes for someone who shoplifts once. And I feel the same for someone who in a single momentary loss of control thumps their partner the term domestic abuser does not fit, again it belittles the term. Like I have said on numerous occasions this does not mean there should be no consequences, there absolutley should have been.

It belittles the victim, not the perpetrator. It was only once, so what are you complaining about?

 

[rogersix]

No I can't to any of your comments. Nouns like drug user, thief and domestic abuser infer repetitive behavior. For example It is utterly ludicrous given the context of a person who takes a couple of puffs on a joint once in their life to label them a drug user, in fact it belittles the term. The same goes for someone who shoplifts once. And I feel the same for someone who in a single momentary loss of control thumps their partner the term domestic abuser does not fit, again it belittles the term. Like I have said on numerous occasions this does not mean there should be no consequences, there absolutley should have been.

maybe, you should start a thread about it

 

[nickjhs]

The lady in question had a breakdown, ended up in a psychiatric hospital and divorced him.
There was also coercion with her not being allowed to see her friends or to have a car.

Well if true he is a domestic abuser. My comments have been based on what Bruce said and the possible reasons for her saying them. I will qualify this by saying that because someone writes a book or for that matter says something does not make it accurate by default.

 

[Horses Arse]

Has anyone jumped in yet to suggest that the frauds abuser father may have some form of 'disorder' (other than being a @×*#!) and hence everyone criticising him or Bruce is wrong?

Or have we got a few pages to go before that is thrown into the mix?

 

[nickjhs]

It belittles the victim, not the perpetrator. It was only once, so what are you complaining about?

You are completely twisting what I have been saying, at no point have I suggested there was nothing to complain about, quite the opposite in fact. I see it this way if you keep expanding the scope of a term it becomes watered down and almost meaningless. Like I have said he should have been charged with causing GBH. Domestic Abuse is the repeated subjugation through various means be it violent, physiological, financial, etc. of a spouse, not a one off row that ends in a punch being thrown and this is how I understood Bruce's rather clumsy comment.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Well if true he is a domestic abuser. My comments have been based on what Bruce said and the possible reasons for her saying them. I will qualify this by saying that because someone writes a book or for that matter says something does not make it accurate by default.

Stanley Johnson has never disputed it, since the book was published, and Boris said his mother was subject to repeated abuse, physical and mental.

I am looking at it from the point of view from a victim, which is where the vast majority of complaints arose since last Thursday and why Refuge asked Bruce to stand down.
I have witnessed domestic abuse in my own family, and also went through a coercive marriage so I know exactly what I am talking about. I have also worked with court cases regarding domestic abuse.

You didn't mean it like that, but sadly, it is victim blaming. The victims even blame themselves many many times because that's how the abuser works. 'You made me do it'.

 

[herecomesaregular]

You are completely twisting what I have been saying, at no point have I suggested there was nothing to complain about, quite the opposite in fact. I see it this way if you keep expanding the scope of a term it becomes watered down and almost meaningless. Like I have said he should have been charged with causing GBH. Domestic Abuse is the repeated subjugation through various means be it violent, physiological, financial, etc. of a spouse, not a one off row that ends in a punch being thrown and this is how I understood Bruce's rather clumsy comment.

Sorry to be rude but I wish you would just stfu. A simple google of definition, first hit (there's a pun for you) is from womensaid.org.uk:

What is domestic abuse?​

We define domestic abuse as an incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive, threatening, degrading and violent behaviour, including sexual violence, in the majority of cases by a partner or ex-partner, but also by a family member or carer. It is very common. In the vast majority of cases it is experienced by women and is perpetrated by men.​

Note the word "incident", as in singular.

 

[Hotchilidog]

I have sympathy with Bruce. She must be under a huge amount of pressure to be impartial by her Tory bosses.

Her first reaction to the wife beating fact is ‘I’m not disputing what you are saying’, she then says ‘Stanley Johnson has not commented publicly on that’ which is again, factual and textbook. That is where she should have left it.

But, she then goes way too far by quoting some sort of conjecture and 2nd/3rd/4th hand evidence. That’s a mistake and because of the subject matter, it sounds really bad.

I support Bruce and believe the ‘give all Tory criticism context’ culture currently at the BBC influenced her error. It’s really sad she has had to leave her charity but that’s an area mistakes just can’t happen.

As for Stanley Johnson, if we could charge him for treason for bringing into the world the parasite who sold our Country out for his own personal ambition, we should. Nasty little man.

No sympathy at all. Bruce constantly talks over or cuts short the panelist who maybe from "the left" on QT and rarely calls out the BS from the right. As a patron of a domestic violence charity her actions this week were absolutely disgraceful.

 

[MJsGhost]

Stanley Johnson has never disputed it, since the book was published, and Boris said his mother was subject to repeated abuse, physical and mental.

Boris' mum must be so proud that despite this, he believes his dad is worthy of a knighthood.

I can only imagine what that does to his mum (though to be fair, it sounds like the psychology of this is/was par for the course within the family, so it won't be anything new)

Shameful.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Boris' mum must be so proud that despite this, he believes his dad is worthy of a knighthood.

I can only imagine what that does to his mum (though to be fair, it sounds like the psychology of this is/was par for the course within the family, so it won't be anything new)

Shameful.

Unfortunately, there have been indications of it continuing in the family.
Spilt red wine, screaming and shouting Get off me etc.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

I feel the same for someone who in a single momentary loss of control thumps their partner the term domestic abuser does not fit, again it belittles the term. Like I have said on numerous occasions this does not mean there should be no consequences, there absolutley should have been.

At the age of 55, having witnessed first hand my first wife cheating on me, owned 4 pub's, one where some idiot decided to hit my second wife and then hit me, breaking my nose one week after having surgery on it to help with my sinuses. I've been punched on a number of occasions during the time I've owned pubs. Never did I feel the need to hit back and indeed once they've hit you and you just stand there looking at them, their reaction can be enlightening and often it is very obvious what sad individuals they are. Fortunately for me I'm a big bloke so just giving a meaningful stare is enough.

Not once did I have a momentary loss of control. The person who hit me and my wife was restrained until the police arrived.

There's no excuse for hitting people

 

[MJsGhost]

Unfortunately, there have been indications of it continuing in the family.
Spilt red wine, screaming and shouting Get off me etc.

For context and balance, that was just a "one-off", so his attitude to women should be considered perfectly fine until there's any other sign that he's a chip off the old block...

I mean, there's nothing else out there to suggest that he treats women like sh|t is there?

 

[bobby baxter]

I find the Johnsons are a strange family, I am certain that if my father was consistently violent and controlling toward my mother, leading to her being hospitalised and causing a mental breakdown, I would, at least, distance myself from him.

This doesn`t appear to be the case for the three Johnson children, if anything they appear supportive and caring toward him.

Strange.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I find the Johnsons are a strange family, I am certain that if my father was consistently violent and controlling toward my mother, leading to her being hospitalised and causing a mental breakdown, I would, at least, distance myself from him.

This doesn`t appear to be the case for the three Johnson children, if anything they appear supportive and caring toward him.

Strange.

That's where the coercion continues.

Your mother nagged me too much. She knew when I'd had a drink or two, not to say anything to me. She drove me to it. etc etc etc.
Families get split loyalties.

 

[1066familyman]

Ok after watching that clip and at the risk of being slammed I would like to comment on what I perceive to be Bruce's motive. Johnson is described as a wife beater, which brings with it the connotation of someone who repeatedly and systematically abuses their partner, Bruce is pointing out that Yes he did hit her, yes his wife has claimed that her nose was broken and that those who know the couple have stated that this incident was not part of a continuous form of behaviour. I get what she is trying to do, put the situation into context, but I also acknowledge that it does seem like she is defending the behavior which I don't think she is. As egregious as breaking your partners nose in a moment of anger is, I feel, and clearly so does Bruce that this act of violence falls into a different category than what is generally perceived as 'wife beater"

Oh, well that's alright then.

Is that how domestic violence works now? Does it work like us playing a 'top 6' team. We get a free hit.

I'll let my wife know that I'm entitled to a free hit, it may break her nose, but not to worry, it'll only be a one off

 

[Brovion]

Oh, well that's alright then.

Is that how domestic violence works now? Does it work like us playing a 'top 6' team. We get a free hit.

I'll let my wife know that I'm entitled to a free hit, it may break her nose, but not to worry, it'll only be a one off

And adultery? "Oh come on love, I only shagged the one bird once. Doesn't make me an adulterer!"

 

[Fungus]

And adultery? "Oh come on love, I only shagged the one bird once. Doesn't make me an adulterer!"

I feel sure both Boris and Stanley have used that line more than once.