Is it true that David Cameron had sex with a pig? It really doesn't matter Lord Ashcroft's claims will amuse those who already hate the Prime Minister, but they won't change anyone's mind please log in to view this image David Cameron, the Prime Minister. please log in to view this image By James Kirkup 9:34AM BST 21 Sep 2015 please log in to view this image 137 Comments There is, as they say, only one story the political world is sniggering about today. In an unambiguously hostile biography of David Cameron, it is reported that as a young man the Prime minister placed his private parts in the mouth of a dead pig. This is said to have been part of an initiation for an aristocratic Oxford University dining club. There is a photograph, it is said. There are so many questions that flow from this, but possibly the most important are: is it true? And what is the political impact of this story? First, the truth. Is it true? It doesn't matter. As Lyndon Johnson knew, the real point of accusing your enemy of sex with pigs is to force him to deny it. True or not, the image is so vivid it sticks in the mind, indelibly colouring someone's reputation. And LBJ was operating in the pre-internet age. Today online debate is emotion first, facts a long-distant second. please log in to view this image Protesters outside the Conservative party conference in 2008 Barely 12 hours after publication, the internet has decided that David Cameron did something unspeakable with a pig. Nothing can change that. Even a the most convincing and comprehensive refutation of the story, a sworn confession from everyone involved that they made it up, won't change the story: it would just become a footnote on a Wikipedia page, a thing clever people say in years to come when the story is retold in pubs ("actually it wasn't true"). Some stories are so compelling the truth can't change them. Look up who really deleted Milly Dowler's voicemails to see what I mean. "Tthere really aren't any political consequences of a story that the Prime Minister did something rude to a pig" And does this matter? How does it affect politics? I suspect some of my trade will have a go at arguing that it does matter, that it has political significance. They'll say it adds to the image of the young Cameron as a man of privileged depravity, a man who lived a life far removed from the rest of the country. For the truly partisan, it becomes a matter of comparison: when Jeremy Corbyn was fighting for justice for the poor, David Cameron and his posh mates were having sex with innocent farm animals. Et cetera. If that sounds weak and unconvincing it's because it is. Perverse as it might sound, there really aren't any political consequences of a story that the Prime Minister did something rude to a dead pig. It won't change anyone's mind about him, though it may convince some that they were right in what they already thought. It won't change a single vote, and wouldn't have done so even if Mr Cameron was standing again. In summary, this country is now led by a man whom many voters will forever believe or suspect once had sex with a dead pig. And that fact has essentially no political significance. It's a funny old world sometimes.
Isn't this story an episode from Charlie Brooker's excellent Black Mirror series? http://www.channel4.com/programmes/black-mirror/on-demand/49114-001
Another suspect comes forward please log in to view this image Kermit's not taking the news so well please log in to view this image
putting his privates in a dead pig's mouth is hardly having sex with a pig. typical media twisting of a non story.
this was as Oxford Uni. A lot worse initiations go on at Public School though. (back to this one again!)
