Ivan Massow on Question Time
Mark D 30 Nov 1999 at 11:00 GMT

Well, who saw Ivan Massow on Question Time last week?
Goodness, wasn't he crap. He may look gorgeous, but I'm afraid he doesn't really seem to have much up top when it comes to political debate - he even made Germaine Greer seem like she was talking sense!
Ivan if you're reading this: Stick to what you're good at, making money and looking loverly, and stop trying to push yourself forward as a propsective Tory MP. I know they're desparate for MPs, but are they *that* desparate (well, maybe....)

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Toptom 30 Nov 1999 at 11:25 GMT

I remember Massow when he was a bumptious little nobody and a proper tart as well - now he's got money he's still a bumptious little nobody and still a tart - should fit in well as a tory MP.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Chiro 30 Nov 1999 at 11:55 GMT

Well said TT!

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
trambo 30 Nov 1999 at 12:25 GMT

Err can we leave Germaine out of it,she's gorgeous!

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
apo 30 Nov 1999 at 13:45 GMT

I thinks he might be an Uncle Tom for the Tory's, sort of a token queer that says right, moral things.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Mark D 30 Nov 1999 at 14:25 GMT

Well, the sad thing is, he's not even that, really. He's more of a wannabe Uncle Tom .
At the moment he's after stepping into Jeffrey Archole's shoes as their London Mayor candidate, but he just hasn't got the charisma. A safe anonymous Tory seat in the Shires is probably about the most he could aim for, but he's going to need to take some lessons in humbug and double standards from Portaloo before that looks likely.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Tigger 30 Nov 1999 at 20:50 GMT

I saw him and phowaaar! He's incredibly gorgeous. But he's obviously got nothing between his ears at all. Just shows that no one has everything.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
James 30 Nov 1999 at 21:05 GMT

He's gay and gorgeous. What more do you want? Why would you expect him to have anything between his ears?
Sorry, I'm having a (very) off day!

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Will 1 Dec 1999 at 11:20 GMT

Yeah, I saw him to on question time and now have a boyhood crush on him. Well, i have to have something to keep me occupied. I must be in 'kind mode' today because i put his lack of personality down to first time nerves. Thought he was a lot more sensible than the other dear old queen, Sir Teddy Heath. Now he did get my goat, so to speak, when they were discussuing the problem of drugs. Talk about sweeping statments and not being in touch. Anyway, back to ivan, i think he's hunky, spunky and fab and actually a good role model for us.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Cavan 2 Dec 1999 at 22:15 GMT

Look some people are not gifted with speaking out in public. Ivan may not be the most articulate and If anything Ivan came across as a little over his depth especially in the presence of the ever super-charged intellectual wizard that is Germaine Greer. Could any of you hold you own in front of her, I bet not.
Ivan has to have something between his ears he wouldn't have got where he is with his business if he was stupid now would he? Honestly why are gay men such a lot of bitches, this tall poopy syndrome in this country seems worse amongst gay men. Why does the gay community see fit to begrudge him success, and why cant he be a Tory if he wants. The gay press seems to be to blame for this attitude and you all ought to recognize that everything you read isn't always the truth.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Mark D 3 Dec 1999 at 10:30 GMT

Two points really: 1) It's got nothing to do with 'tall poppy symdrome' Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses and political debate most certainly is not Ivan Massow's. By flaunting himself so much in the media as a prospective Tory 'personality', he's making a complete tit of himself and I don't think he realises. It's just so embarassing to watch him try. This is why I originally said he should stick to something he can do - i.e. making money.
(Oh, and I know Tory 'personality' is an oxymoron these days.)
2) Germaine Greer a 'super-charged intellectual wizard'?!? Hahahaha. That's a good one. I do hope that was a facetious remark. Maybe thirty years ago, yes, but if you said that to any of her colleagues at Cambridge now, they'd laugh you off the stage.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Housman 4 Dec 1999 at 13:50 GMT

I heard this incredibly inarticulate thicky on the Today program yesterday morning. He couldn't even complete a sentence. I thought, Jesus who is this moron. Turned out it was IM. How can he think he's worthy to be mayor of London when he can't even string a sentence together?

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
fred 8 Dec 1999 at 00:20 GMT

Whats wrong with Ivan Massow? I thought he came across pretty well. He will certainly get my vote. There is something incredibly appealing about succesful business men who get involved in politics. At least they have a succesful track record in front of them, rather than spending their entire lifes in politics like that plonker, Tony Blair.
Oh, and he hunts foxes too, so it is nice to realise that he isn't politically coorect.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Tigger 8 Dec 1999 at 14:00 GMT

He won't get your vote, because he's finally realised he's got no chance, and withdrawn.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Toptom 8 Dec 1999 at 14:15 GMT

him and the deadful Teresa Gormenghast - but Massow couldn't have been serious about standing - he wasn't even a one-issue candidate - he only knows about making money and flirting. Don't forget, I knew him when ... Shame he didn't stand really - I could have sold my misty memories to the tabloids!

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Tigz 8 Dec 1999 at 16:00 GMT

Shaun Woodward was sacked for opposing Section 28 and now Gormenghast applies to stand on a 'Save Section 28' ticket and she is ruled out. What on earth is going on in the Tory party?
I think Norris might be the best person for the job, but can a Conservative really win?

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Toptom 8 Dec 1999 at 16:15 GMT

there's a simple answer to that question Tigz, - no, an unknown Tory wouldn't stand a chance, which is why Archer was the dream-ticket answer to their prayers.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Tigger 8 Dec 1999 at 16:25 GMT

I meant, can Norris win? He's well known.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Toptom 8 Dec 1999 at 16:30 GMT

politically quite well known - but not what you'd call a personality in the league of Ken Livingstone or wonderful Glenda - this London Mayor election has very little to do with politics and everything to do with a popularity contest. London voters aren't fools, they know the mayor isn't going to be able to achieve much - if anything - and will vote for whoever looks like the most entertaining.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Nick 10 Dec 1999 at 19:50 GMT

Ivan Massow is a wishy-washy, pretty boy with far too much money who thinks that this is the only thing you need to be in the Tory party (well, he got that one right I suppose). I seem to remember reading quite a few columns by him in the Guardian over the summer in which he said such sweet, intelligent things as, 'All gays love Ann 'Doris Karloff' Widdecombe because, bassically, queers will forgive any fascist, populist, misogynistic bitch as long as she is ugly and strident.' (I paraphrase slightly!) While this may be true of some of our more apathetic, naive friends in poofland, I, and many others cannot stand Widdecombe, Younge or Thatcher precisely for the reason that they see queers as the last target for their hateful propagandist, populist, pseudo-christian views now that everybody else is legally off-limits. Massow is a tit and anybody swayed by his looks, power!!!! and money should have a deep look inside themselves and see they can really say that an apathetic w***er like him is really qualified to speak up for gay rights. He is no better than the rest of his party on the issue of gay rights and the soon people realise this, the sooner all the self-hating, apathetic, tory-supporting, 'Oh, I don't do (gay-)politics' queers in this country will realise that we are still, and prbably always will be, shafted from every side in parliament.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Cav 13 Dec 1999 at 22:35 GMT

I've come to the conclusion that most of you have been totally seduced by all thay New Labour shiney synthetic hollow rubbish.
Not that I'm supporting the Tories. Sarah Kramer will get my vote.. if I decide to vote.
I still think alot of gay men (in this city in particular) are unfairly bitchy towards Ivan Massow. It is called envy where I come from, but of course this is London and general bitchiness and jealousy are part and parcel of being a capital queen. So no surprises there.
Also Mark D I bet you wouldn't even dare to tackle Germaine Greer face to face for debate.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Housman 13 Dec 1999 at 23:05 GMT

Oh come off it, I heard him again on the Today program this morning. The guy's a moron. I couldn't give a stuff about his sexuality and I couldn't be less envious of him if I tried. I barely know who he is except when he crops up on the radio trying to string three words together.

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
Nick 13 Dec 1999 at 23:20 GMT

I have never been seduced by New Labour. I think that their behaviour in terms of gay rights in the last few years (since the election) has been almost as repellent as the tories. I agree that the Lib-Dems are the only party left in Westminster that are vaguely worth voting for. If I lived in London I think that I would support Ken simply for the fact that in his time he has managed to make Maggie the Harpie so mad that she disbanded an entire level of government to curb him, and also he has managed to piss Revd. Blair off so much that Millbank will go to any lengths to stop him. Now that Norris is out, who in the Tory camp could a gay person support? I'd love to say to everyonbe to support Kramer but, unfortunately, that could result in a swing away from Labour which would benefit the tories enourmously. Cav is completely right about Massow. He is a complete tit who still thinks that the Tories are backing him for some job in the future. If he were to lose any of his wealth, I think that he would get a very nasty shock. The Tories at the moment can barely tolerate poofs. They've already purged to pro-gay righters from their ranks. Maggies dream of an ultra-right wing, intolerant, bigoted and self-serving Tory Party is fast approaching and if they get into power I don't think we are going to have a very good time. (As if we are having a great time now!!!!!)

Re: Ivan Massow on Question Time
bill in sussex 14 Dec 1999 at 15:40 GMT

the gay community has made the sumptious Ivan, the rich man is he today..he's been creaming you off on the back of insurance and loans,... if darling Ivan wants to promote himself as a tory political animal, well, he's certainly got the cash to do it...by the way, he's almost a neighbour of mine! Yikes! hope he don't ask me round for canapes and dom perignon.....a packet of smokey bacon crisps and a plastic glass of QC wine at Red Ken's would be more of an intellectual treat!Ken's at least more interesting?

Politcal gays
katie 14 Dec 1999 at 16:00 GMT

I am a str8 girl butting in, but I think its disgusting that you're not supporting Ivan Massow. Gays in the Tory ranks is a good thing and he might be useful in changing old prejudices and helping to repeal clause 28, gays in the military etc. Labours Chris smith is wishy washy, that podgy guy who beat Madam Portillo is all gloss and little substance and as for Mandy....

Re: Politcal gays
Nick 14 Dec 1999 at 16:20 GMT

I agree that queers in the tory ranks is no bad thing. However, what I cannot understand is how somebody with conservative politics but liberal values can stand to be in such a bigotted and illiberal party. I also agree that the 'out' queers in Labour are a load of complete apathetic tossers. This is why I am increasingly having sympathy with Tatchell and OUTRAGE. They have principles and they fight for them. As does Stonewall. As long Labour or the Tories are in power, gays are going to get nothing. If you really believe that section 28 will go in this parliament or that their will be a concerted effort to equalise the age of consent, I believe, is living in cloud cuckoo land. All queers who think that we deserve a fair pop should get off their asses, get down to London and really show the govt. and Parliament in general that we do care when we are screwed over and we want something done. Massow, Woodward et al. are screwed in the Tory party. They will have lost everything by this time next year if the Tories carry on like this. Bradshaw, Twigg, Cashman et al. couldn't give a fuck because they have got their political careers to think about. Their are very few politicians who actually give a fuck about principles or anything that happens beyond the house and it's time we did something about it.

Re: Politcal gays
Mark D 14 Dec 1999 at 17:15 GMT

Cav: If you genuinely have 'come to the conclusion that most of you have been totally seduced by all thay New Labour shiney synthetic hollow rubbish' then I don't think you've been reading what people have said on here very carefully. Where, exactly, are all the comments indicating this, please? Virtually everyone is rightly slagging off NuLabour for dragging their heels over the AoC, gays in the military, Section 28, etc., etc., etc.
The deluded ones are people who think that any other party is going to provide anything much better than this. The LibDems possibly might, but they're never going to be in a position to do anything, and personally I find their sanctimonious holier-than-thou twaddle rather sick-making. I've seen them in power in local government, and was rather glad when they got chucked out last year, even though it was by a minority Tory regime. At least Tories admit that they're Tories!
And I would *love* to tackle Germaine Greer face to face for a debate - there are plenty of people I'd be scared to as they'd wipe the floor with me, but GG isn't one of them. Do you actually listen to some of the things she says now - they're often the most appalling generalisations which bare no relation to reality? I once heard her say she doesn't like watching films and tv about gay people because she thinks 'buggery should carry a government health warning'. Her hounding of one of the fellows at her Cambridge college just because she was a transexual was disgusting - and she later tried to explain away her behaviour by saying she was 'publicising certain issues'. Most people there reckon she just did it because she was more popular than GG. So, yes, I'd LOVE to tackle GG about lots of things she's said and written in the last few years. Thirty years ago she was a genius, but she's been living on past glories for far too long, and is now the worst type of media whore, IMO.

Re: Politcal gays
Mark D 14 Dec 1999 at 17:30 GMT

I think more gay people would support IM in the Tory party if he was any good, but he's just embarassingly bad. The fact that his political judgement is so bad is the reason he's trying so hard to be the tame Tory poof, and the reason he aligned himself so closely to Jeffrey Archole.
If the Tory party was genuinely libertarian, as they always claim to be, they'd be rather attractive to a lot of gay people - higher disposable incomes, pink pound, greater freedoms, and all that stuff. But the fact is, you scratch a self-professed 'freedom-loving libertarian' and you usually find a bigot underneath. Look at Tatch, Tebbit, Hague et al... Steven Norris seems to be the only half decent one, and they're trying their utmost to sweep him under the carpet.