Posts by Craig Young
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to Lisa_J,
It takes two people to commit adultery, though, Lisa. I'm probably willing to cut Bevan some slack because my partner and I have a daughter the same age. Added to which, Brown was surely old enough to know better than to do this. Added to which, he's a career politician who may well experience diminished damage to his career unless the allegations about improper council employment allegations turn out to be true. However, can the same be said in terms of Bevan Chuang? So, yes, I do think the comparison with Hester Prynne is appropriate. She has to bear much of the burden for this.
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to Mark Easterbrook,
Sadly no, Pope Bob hasn't refrained from pontificating. He points out that Shane Jones fell on his sword for watching mucky DVDs in hotel rooms and has argued that Len "must" be decapitated politically for his dalliance with Ms Chuang. However, wind the clock back a few months and you'll spot a Family Farce "Value Your Vote' mayoral moralists guide which actually recommended that Auckland voters *back* Len Brown because of his opposition to street sex work!
Here's a link to both:
http://www.familyfirst.org.nz
http://www.valueyourvote.org.nz -
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
No, don't. McCoskrie and other fundies get strangely overexcited about spanking enough already and I shudder to think what mentioning bondage, rope and restraints would have on them.
-
Hard News: Moving right along?, in reply to SteveH,
That, and a Massey communication law paper I did twenty years ago, which referred to the law of defamation...and I actually agree, sexual scandal is little ground for demanding evisceration, whatever moralistic poseurs like Bob McCoskrie (Family First) demand. Financial irregularities tend to be what usually caused political downfall in many recent New Zealand political scandals.
-
And meanwhile, outside the Bombay Hills, let's try to keep this in perspective, shall we? The problem is not that Brown dipped his wick, it is that he allegedly may have interfered in a council employment decision to get Ms Chuang appointed somewhere, which is more serious. Does Brown's extramarital dalliance affect his capabilities as a public official? Clearly not. By and large, considering most recent New Zealand political scandals, politicians infidelity only merits censure and resignation if there is financial irregularity in tandem, and financial irregularity in itself is enough to warrant resignation or dismissal. Sexual scandals are only usually fatal if there are questions of rape, child sexual abuse or domestic violence involved eg Graham Capill.
I do feel sorry for Ms Chuang. Honestly, shades of Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter."
I do recommend Laura Kipnis' "How to Become A Scandal" New York: Metropolitan: 2009 and her consequent article about (US) political scandals in Harpers.
-
Given that no-one's slammed Brown for his hypocritical grandstanding over the depravity of street sex workers engaging in survival sex while engaging in extramarital nooky with a younger woman himself, I might as well be the first one. And given the possibility of improper appointment of same, Len's mayoral future seems bleak. I'm told several people have been sighted with "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Minto" t-shirts already...
-
Actually, I used to live in College Street, only a block away from the drama that unfolded in Chaytor Street all those years ago. I was completely oblivious to it.
-
Hard News: Local interest, in reply to Hamish N00nan,
And, in fact, the local cops oppose the Manukau anti-soliciting bill because it diverts their attention from intervention and resolution against violent crime in the area.
-
The Prostitutes Collective conducted negotiations with good faith with the Auckland Council, but it seems that specific elements on that council were unwilling to compromise, or, as I've noted, adequately explain why existing statutory public order legislation is insufficient to combat any public order offences.
-
Hamish's response to your question seems to suggest that there are specific pressure groups trying to make mischief over the issue and blow things out of proportion. I'm basing my observations on what the Ministry of Justice and its Prostitution Law Review Committee have stated in this context. In terms of regulation, the prohibitionists have yet to convincingly explain why existing public order statutes like the Summary Offences Act 1981, Litter Act 1979 et al cannot be invoked in this context. The Auckland Council certainly isn't willing to do so. Indeed, it seems to reject the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 out of hand.