The Sad Story of Mr. Hague

I'm always anxious as to how these are read- if they are read at all. They're merely off-the-cuff musings that I should probably take more time to think about, but that if I don't write down immediately will probably fizzle out and never reappear. Maybe I shouldn't even write them at all. With that in mind, do proceed.

Picking up the tail-end of this entirely unimportant non-news story, I feel compelled to write a short piece on my belief that the rumours about Foreign Secretary William Hague's sexuality and following PR disaster-a-thon were not at all worth writing about. Got that?

Already, one coaltion minister has, effectively, been forced from his post after a media storm about homosexuality. And here's the thing- that story wasn't about Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws' sexuality at all. It was about his questionable expenses claims, a misdemeanour that happened to coincide with the fact that Laws paid rent to a person who happened to be his long-term partner. The disclosure of his homosexuality was somehow twisted by the press so as to make it seem as though this was about something more sinister, more seedy, than it was- and in fact, it was nothing. We recently saw prisons minister Crispin Blunt express his wish for time to 'come to terms' with his homosexuality- as though he was forced, all of a sudden, to become accustomed to having wheels where his feet once were. I don't mean to suggest that he doesn't need an adjustment period if his life has changed significantly- he has left his wife, and thus possibly his home as well- but the language used to convey this situation still betrays a benign homophobia that colours the way in which these people are portrayed in the media. The hideous result of mixing MPs' private lives and their media representation came to a head with the utter non-story of William Hague's sharing of a room with an aide when campaigning. Now, I'm not the biggest Hague fan, but if his job is now under threat as a result of this shitstorm, then that's not right.

So, it transpired that Hague had indeed shared a room with aide and colleague Chris Myers (who has since quit his job and fled from the intrusions of the media) whilst on the campaign trail for the general election. Teeheehee, he's sharing a room with a man- he's GAY! Many Tories have blasted Bill Hague for this apparent 'error of judgement'- as though we the public are helplessly and interminably compelled to put two and two (read 'man' and 'man') together and get five (read 'deviant/devious homosexuality'). Of course, by no means is this a phenomenon exclusive to the happenstance of two men sharing a room, for if an unmarried (or separately married) man and woman shared a room, people would cry 'foul play' all the same. This is surely a symptom of a collective mindset by which we're driven to suspect, doubt, decry and denounce at every opportunity- where we're all so self-important and yet tragically insecure, where we need to condemn others so that we ourselves are absolved. Gone is the innoncence of companionship, where two men might dare to do something so suggestive as share a hotel room. The nihilist's explanation for this suspicion is of course that people are all morally corrupted and probably guilty of everything with which we charge them. Unfortunately, a few thousand years of inhumanity, death and destruction don't do much to prove them wrong. But morals are an intangible and arbitrary construct, and so don't really have any business guiding our animalistic thrill-seeking pleasure-quest through life, right? Another day, another post.

I've lost my place. Apparently these rumours of homosexuality have dogged Hague for a while, for reasons that The Telegraph un-tongue-in-cheekedly points out (in an editorial, no less) are probably applicable to half of all MPs, let alone Tory ones. The rest of the story, I shan't go in to here- but it's the next part in which Bill, unfortunately, makes a mess of things himself. And I don't mean in the way that Alastair Campbell seems to think- that, by announcing his and his wife's history of miscarriages in a public announcement, he has somehow fuelled yet more speculation about his sexuality. Rather, by putting out an intensely personal statemant about deeply sad family matters, he has further convinced the media that his private life is the property of hacks who have nothing better with which to fill newspaper pages or screen time than affairs of the home. Instead of crushing malicious rumours (and I'm worried that the 'malicious' might refer to an accusation of homosexuality being offensive, rather than the intent behind the accusation) and getting on with his job- which he could stand to do better- he has unbolted the door to the figurative politician's home, and invited the hungry journos in to take photographs onf said politician's figurative underwear drawer. Or something like that. Now Hague's judgement is being questioned- just like David Laws' was. And I fear that Laws' fiscal affairs weren't the only reason.