Abusive and creepy

Written By: - Date published: 6:30 am, April 24th, 2015 - 274 comments
Categories: john key, Minister for International Embarrassment - Tags: , , , , ,

key-cretin<

Is John Key a cretin? Fair question, but no. In the case of waitress Amanda Bailey Key’s behaviour was abusive and creepy, but he knew exactly what he was doing, he was exercising his power. In the case of all these kids, with photos and videos of Key fondling their hair, that’s just creepy as hell.

The spinoff into dirty politics at The Herald is significant to be sure – and that too has attracted international coverage in The Guardian. But the main issue is Key’s behaviour.

Abusive

See the open letter from the National Council of Women. Listen to Marlyin Waring on RNZ (transcript here). Human Rights Commissioner Jackie Blue summed it up when she said “It’s never OK to touch someone without their permission. There are no exceptions” (unfortunately Minister for Women Louise Upston disgraced herself and her role). Graham McCready is laying charges under Section 62 of the Human Rights Act. Winston Peters is calling for a police investigation. Alison Mau wrote an excellent piece on blaming the victim. But the very best piece of writing (perhaps on the whole mess so far) was by Burnt Out Teacher at The Daily Blog -“I had hoped so hard I’d never know your name” – everyone should read it.

Creepy

Key may actually have a genuine condition, trichophilia. If so that’s his business, but he’s got to learn to control it in public from now on. There are too many video clips cropping up of him fondling kids’ hair: The first to emerge (from this longer piece), this one from One News yesterday at 0:20 (“The boys don’t pull it do they? No. That’s good. We don’t want that to happen do we”), and a couple of examples on 3 News last night (0:20). Most of the pictures have been collected here.

Abusive and creepy. Of all the ways Key could have shot his leadership and his legacy in the foot – this really was the stupidest.

In other summaries see Bryce Edwards’ usual political roundup, and cartoons and images, and weirdest of all:

https://twitter.com/KirkSerpes/status/591140068581969920

That animation on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJCqnInb1MM

(Slight update 10:23)

274 comments on “Abusive and creepy ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    24 April 2015 at 6:58 am

    The New Zealand Herald has been assiduous in ensuring the name suppression for a prominent Northlander has been kept in place.
    Yet they actively went out to find out the name of a victim of harassment.

    Says so much about who they represent.

    • vto 1.1
      24 April 2015 at 8:02 am

      +1

      Protect the man

      Expose the girl

      That is you granny Herald. You are as dirty and disgusting as John Key

    • dukeofurl 1.2
      24 April 2015 at 8:08 am

      Without knowing the details, the northland name suppression is to protect the victims too.

      • vto 1.2.1
        24 April 2015 at 8:10 am

        Yes it is, though don’t know how that can work in practice in these circumstances.

        When the ‘prominent NZer’ name comes out it I suspect it will merge with Key’s hair-pulling and it will be all over for the Nats and the values and judgments of their supporters

        • emergency mike 1.2.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 8:40 am

          My thoughts too vto. Anyone know when that name suppression expires?

          So how much awful is too much National supporters?

          • dukeofurl 1.2.1.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 9:56 am

            Its unlikey to ever expire. When you are protecting the victims not the perpetrator its normally permanent

            • Murray Rawshark 1.2.1.1.1.1
              24 April 2015 at 3:31 pm

              It expires at the start of the High Court trial. The prominent NZer charged with sexual assault of children under 12 may ask for it to be extended at that time. If it is, against the victims’ wishes, it will not be to protect them.

              • the pigman …
                24 April 2015 at 4:17 pm

                If I remember correctly, Asher extended it to the end of the criminal trial. It would make no sense for it to lapse at the very beginning of the trial, given the purpose of the order.

                My sense, irrespective of whether prominent NZer is found guilty or not, is that the victims’ views will be of great weight when deciding whether to make the suppression order permanent.

                • Murray Rawshark …
                  24 April 2015 at 4:39 pm

                  In another case of someone who held the same job, the victim has definitely asked for suppression to be lifted. Their views sometimes seem of much less weight than the offender’s social and political connections. It’s not All Black and white.

      • Paul Campbell 1.2.2
        24 April 2015 at 8:50 am

        there’s more than one name suppression protecting such people, don’t forget we have one here in Otago too – there’s a bit of a pattern there

      • Murray Rawshark 1.2.3
        24 April 2015 at 3:28 pm

        No it’s not. It could only have been lifted if the victims had wanted it lifted. It was lifted, but then appealed. Judge’s do generally follow the law in making their decisions, good or bad.

    • Chooky 1.3
      24 April 2015 at 9:21 am

      +100 Paul…”The New Zealand Herald has been assiduous in ensuring the name suppression for a prominent Northlander has been kept in place.
      Yet they actively went out to find out the name of a victim of harassment.”

      …obvious sexism and corrupt bias…and she did not agree to an interview for the Herald or exposure in the Herald!

      • Murray Rawshark 1.3.1
        24 April 2015 at 3:37 pm

        Chooky, we have no formal knowledge that he/she/it is from Northland.

        • Chooky 1.3.1.1
          25 April 2015 at 10:38 am

          yes legal point taken re other court case

          … but i guess my point is that the Herald named Amanda Bailey …the victim of the PM’s continued harassment….against her wishes…and after an interview which was really a setup by the PMs’ friends

  2. Charles 2
    24 April 2015 at 7:49 am

    The logic of the final paragraph titled “Creepy” is flawed. There are plenty of natural genuine conditions that cause serious damage that cannot be made to be ok by simply keeping them out of the public eye. Telling Key to control it, or keep it invisible, is the same as saying the behaviour is fine, as long as no one sees it.

    Which is not the case here, or what happened.
    His behaviour has caused serious damage.
    Behind the scenes, it caused serious damage.

    I’m trying not to think too much about the level of damage this has done, because everytime I read comments about it on popular sites, it seems that people don’t realise what has happened. Maybe the thousands of people who have been just a few steps down this road don’t have an internet connection.

    This woman will probably never work again. If she hasn’t lost her job, she’s about to. She’s 26, a waitress, and she just exposed the slimy skin of NZ society’s nice white underbelly. Her nice white smiling middle-class dreams are over. Her career, in anything, is over. Her employers have already set her up, the MSM tried to set her up, no one told her what would happen, even though she apparently knows people who do know. Shamefull. Key may be a nasty bugga, but the people who stand by smiling and egging her on, those are the enablers – probably worse than Key. The umm-ing and ahh-ing over whether it’s a crime or not, because He is who HE is, that is a crime against humanity. Those kind of people would stand under an incinerator chimney, ash raining down on them, and later say they didn’t know.

    There’s no way to justify it. Someone in another thread called the behaviour, feudal. That’s fairly accurate, but even that masks the truth that we’re happy to give up this woman to a life of impoverished nothing, as long as we don’t have to see what it was that we did, and will do today, as we totter off to work. Feudal makes it sound safe, far-away, something in the past, medieval, like Robin Hood will appear at any moment.

    The only thought that stops me hating the people I see on the street; because half of them voted for Key, and at least half of the rest still aspire to “feudal” views; and the only thing that gives me room to breath in my conscience, of how I’ve contributed to this cultural sickness; is the idea that if what she says is true – that she did know what would happen, what it would cost her – then she’s probably been given a hefty consolation prize by people far worse than John Key. And that theory is so impossible, yet so eagerly plausible, that it becomes something on par with 911 conspiracy theories.

    John Key is the criminal here. The public, and his voters, we are his enablers. Our culture is derranged. Is it better to know that, or just “keep it out of the public eye?” What could each of us do today, at our places or work or wherever, that will stop it beginning again with someone else? Do we even care?

    • emergency mike 2.1
      24 April 2015 at 8:31 am

      That’s quite the unhinged ramble you’ve got there Charles. You seem very, concerned.

      But I have to disagree with this: “This woman will probably never work again.” Firstly, because I read that she has already received numerous job offers from other cafes. Secondly, it’s not her reputation that’s plummeting by the hour here – that would be John ‘my little pony’ Key’s reputation. Amanda Bailey is already a hero to a lot of people.

      Regardless, thanks again for your obvious concern.

      • Charles 2.1.1
        24 April 2015 at 8:58 am

        Huh? So it’s ok because someone offered her a job she doesn’t have yet? So forget she’s being sized up to lose, or has lost her job illegally, or why.

        The fact she is “a hero” illustrates how she’s being used by society. It’s called projection. But no one has a stake in the game like she does.

        Thanks for your ho-hummery. Thanks again for your obvious lack of concern, and responsibility. And apologist rambling for illegal industrial relations.

        • emergency mike 2.1.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 9:25 am

          “Huh? So it’s ok because someone offered her a job she doesn’t have yet? So forget she’s being sized up to lose, or has lost her job illegally, or why.”

          I was simply pointing out that your claim that “This woman will probably never work again” is easily contradicted, (aside from it just being presumptuous, baseless, and ridiculous), by her having already received multiple job offers.

          Neither do I see how anything else you wrote in ramble no. 2 supports that claim.

          So I’m the one calling her a hero, and you’re the one saying she “will probably never work again” and “her career, in anything, is over”, but I’m the bastard here? Got it.

          • Charles 2.1.1.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 9:53 am

            If offers were realities, wouldn’t we all be sitting pretty? So no, not easiliy contradicted.

            Refer industrial relations law.

            You’re using her as a projected archetype for whatever it is that you can’t do. She is whoever she is. She is subject to certain realities. But she is no “hero”; don’t objectify her either as hero, or anything else.

            You being a bastard might be a bit rough, I didn’t say that about you, stop judging yourself so harshly. Address whatever it is that you feel you can’t confront, the thing you project onto your hero above, and then come back and deal in the the real issues this woman now faces.

            • emergency mike 2.1.1.1.1.1
              24 April 2015 at 10:33 am

              “If offers were realities, wouldn’t we all be sitting pretty?”

              Well I don’t know how it works in your reality, but what happens in mine is that when I get a job offer, I can choose to either accept or decline. If I decline then I don’t get the job. If I accept then I do get the job. I’m not making this up. This has really gone down for me just like that numerous times.

              “You’re using her as a projected archetype for whatever it is that you can’t do. She is whoever she is. She is subject to certain realities.”

              Spare me the cookie cutter Jungian analysis and empty rhetoric. “She is whoever she is. She is subject to certain realities” Oh you think so? But is she really?

              I called her a hero because I think she is very brave, not because I’m etching her portrait on my bedroom wall and writing songs about her. Get over yourself.

              So when exactly are you going to explain to me why she is never going to work again and never have any career ever?

              • Huginn …
                24 April 2015 at 1:47 pm

                Is she never going to work again and never have any career ever? Really?

                Here’s what we’ve learned about Amanda Bailey:

                – She writes well; from her writing we can see that she thinks clearly.

                – She has a positive and friendly attitude.

                – She’s decisive – certainly prepared to initiate action, but also able to think on her feet and act on information as it comes to hand, indeed, as she brings it to hand.

                – And so far she’s shown herself to be disciplined and thus able to control the flow of information.

                All very usefull and desirable in the workplace. I think she’s going to have a wonderful career – if not a long one as a waitress for the Hip Group.

          • cogito 2.1.1.1.2
            24 April 2015 at 10:13 am

            @EM
            Agreed.

            She is a hero and she **WILL** work again because, fortunately, there are still people in society – even in little small-minded vindictive natzi NZ – who value those who are prepared to stand up to sleaze, evil and corruption.

    • Murray Rawshark 2.2
      24 April 2015 at 3:44 pm

      I think you’ve been a little over the top here. I don’t give a stuff if FJK plays with the hair of as many willing partners as he likes. In fact, I have heard that Mike Hosking is frantically applying growth formula to his. His kink is not the issue if he keeps it between himself and willing partners. He has shown he can’t and he is once again not fit to run a chook raffle, let alone a country.

      By pulling him up on it, we are not enabling him. By supporting Amanda Bailey, we are not enabling him. Your diatribe about how her life is totally fucked now and we are all complicit is closer to enabling the prick.

      • Bill 2.2.1
        24 April 2015 at 3:58 pm

        I don’t give a stuff if FJK plays with the hair of as many willing partners as he likes.

        This and similar can’t be said often enough. The shit that is focusing on ‘hair’, as though that was the issue, is beginning to really fuck me off.

        Power and consent. Power and consent. Power and consent. Like the hammer and nail that JK can’t quite connect, the simple and obvious has to be hammered again and again until it gets home for the sake of some people.

  3. emergency mike 3
    24 April 2015 at 8:09 am

    That animation deserves to be shared. Here it is in a nice and easy copy pasta form:

    • ianmac 3.1
      24 April 2015 at 8:25 am

      Yes mike. Pretty good summary but misses out the fondling of little girls’ hair. Wonder who made the youtube clip?

      • Paul Campbell 3.1.1
        24 April 2015 at 8:47 am

        It’s a Taiwanese news channel, they do a lot of these

        • linda 3.1.1.1
          27 April 2015 at 9:55 pm

          this girl has more guts than key ever will and has nothing to answer for in fact iam waiting for crowd funding to get started to donate to fund a lawyer for her to sue her employer or the herald.

  4. dukeofurl 4
    24 April 2015 at 8:11 am

    The article by Alison Mau is good.

    I learned two new things: that she did complain to the cafe manager – (not the owners)

    And the cafe owners have taken great care to protect themselves – and Key. Not a word about unacceptable behaviour.

  5. Observer (Tokeroa) 5
    24 April 2015 at 8:24 am

    If John Key gets away with this, then every grown man in New Zealand will be allowed to play with the head and hair of little Girls.

    Every man will have the right to bully whomever they wish.

    What a disastrous dangerous fool he is!

    • ianmac 5.1
      24 April 2015 at 8:27 am

      Yes. The owners of the chain organised the leak to the Herald but not involving Rosie’s manager. I imagine that the Rosie manager had nearly the same power imbalance as Amanda.

    • You_Fool 5.2
      24 April 2015 at 8:32 am

      I like the idea we can now go up and stroke John Key’s hair whenever we like – can’t wait to have my turn!

  6. ianmac 6
    24 April 2015 at 8:32 am

    Were Key’s comments this morning “horsing around” and misreading the “tea leaves” meant to be funny?

  7. The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 7
    24 April 2015 at 8:33 am

    Rob Hosking nails it:

    I marvel Not for first time, Key’s biggest asset is the lack of sense of proportion of his opponents.

    • emergency mike 7.1
      24 April 2015 at 8:52 am

      Key’s biggest asset has always been his jokey, blokey, court jester, everyman front for his antisocial personality. Just like Saville, Harris, and Gacy. It worked great for them too. Until it didn’t, then it started looking like something else.

      I marvel not for first time, at the moral vacancy of his supporters.

      • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 7.1.1
        24 April 2015 at 10:04 am

        That’s right, Emergency Mike. John Key is exactly like Jimmy Savile.

        Way to demonstrate Rob Hosking’s point.

        • fisiani 7.1.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 10:21 am

          emergency mike – you have Key Derangement Syndrome, just like Laila Harre. You and she cannot compare John Key with Rolf Harris without such a syndrome. You go even further. There is no cure for your illness.

          • Skinny 7.1.1.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 10:53 am

            And you suffer from John trichophilia Key cheerleading syndrome. A particularly irritating disorder of burying your head in the sand and exposing your arse in the breeze to the World no matter what creepy John does. 🙂

          • Alpha z 7.1.1.1.2
            24 April 2015 at 1:06 pm

            (emergency mike – you have Key Derangement Syndrome, )

            fisi, do u know u hve John Key’s bum sniffing syndrome evn when hes shitting in his pants all over world?

        • emergency mike 7.1.1.2
          24 April 2015 at 10:55 am

          “John Key is exactly like Jimmy Savile.”

          Really? I knew Savile was a raging pedo but I didn’t know he had a thing for fondling little girls’ hair every chance he got like John Key does. Thanks for the info.

          I was meaning that there are some parallels in their behaviour, but I wouldn’t, and I didn’t, say they are exactly the same. That would be ridiculous. Not sure why you did.

          • fisiani 7.1.1.2.1
            24 April 2015 at 11:39 am

            When did compare become exactly? You can try to wriggle but your Key Derangement Syndrome is fulminant.

            • McFlock 7.1.1.2.1.1
              24 April 2015 at 11:55 am

              keep up, fizzbang. Gormless was the one who started the “exactly”.

            • Matthew Hooton 7.1.1.2.1.2
              24 April 2015 at 12:03 pm

              They seem not to understand, fisiani, that it is possible to think that (a) any comparison with Rolf Harris is absolutely absurd and a terrible insult to Harris’s victims, and (b) also think that Key is guilty of assault and sexual harassment (and of being a total dickhead) .

              Like Mrs Thatcher, Mr Key is truly lucky with his enemies.

              • te reo putake …
                24 April 2015 at 12:21 pm

                Matthew, you know a bit about PR stuff. Do you reckon it’s a good look for a politician to have people discussing whether or not he is a paedophile?

                • Matthew Hooton …
                  24 April 2015 at 12:25 pm

                  Depends if the observers of that conversation think it is based in reality, or if they think the people conducting the conversation are making the allegation to unfairly smear the other person.

                  • rawshark-yeshe …
                    24 April 2015 at 12:34 pm

                    so specifically in this case ? Key fondles little girls’ hair repeatedly … what do you call a fetish for young girls’ hair Matthew ? I honestly don’t know but maybe you do.

                    I think it is beyond a fetish when the girls are so young and consent is assumed due to the senior social rank of the abuser. What say you ?

                    Then we can discuss if you think it’s beneficial PR wise. Seriously.

                  • te reo putake …
                    24 April 2015 at 12:35 pm

                    Cheers. You do realise that I wasn’t talking about just here on TS? The question is being raised pretty openly, particularly after the TV3 clip last night that focussed on his habit of touching young girls’ hair. My neighbours, (farmers and Nat voters mostly) seem to think it’s a bit odd.

                    Would you advise John to simply put out a press release clearing the matter up? “I am not now, nor have I ever been a practising paedophile” Something like that?

                    • Matthew Hooton …
                      24 April 2015 at 12:50 pm

                      Obviously you know the LBJ pig fucker story.

                    • te reo putake …
                      24 April 2015 at 12:54 pm

                      Indeed I do! Well spotted 😉

                    • rawshark-yeshe …
                      24 April 2015 at 1:12 pm

                      @Matthew .. can you answer my question above please?

                      Hmmm .. and I never knew the LBJ supposed pig was spotted.

                    • newsense …
                      24 April 2015 at 7:30 pm

                      Former National Party leader’s advisor compares Key’s hair fondling victims to pigs and says that Key is definitely not a paedophile.

                      If only we were dishonest media folk that would be the front page, though all of that headline is absolutely true for a given value of…

                • Skinny …
                  24 April 2015 at 12:48 pm

                  I don’t think people are very smart saying or implying that. Actually it is very nasty. After watching all these pony tail grabbings I do believe Key has a deep seeded problem. This could relate to being brought up Father less. Starting to think its a little sad. So on the pony tail front have decided to tone it down a bit.

              • emergency mike …
                24 April 2015 at 1:21 pm

                Ah Matthew Hooton, the far right’s voice of reason come to help out one of our most pathetic tr0lls.

                Actually I understand that it’s possible to think anything at all, including what you wrote. Wow right?

                My comparison was regarding my purely speculative opinion about certain aspects of Key and Harris’ public behaviours and personalities. Not regarding their crimes nor victims. You seem not to understand that.

                This is blog where anyone can say whatever they like as long as it’s accompanied by some kind of argument. And they frequently do. This isn’t the opposition strategy development center.

                It’s great that you seem to think that Key is guilty of assault and sexual harassment. And I noticed you’ve also taken the opportunity to opine that Key’s days are numbered, and that certain business leaders are getting grumpy that certain business wants of theirs are not being met. How nice. Your sincere concern for Amanda Bailey is overwhelming.

                Speaking of crimes, is it a crime in this country to supply someone’s address to a person who is talking about having that someone murdered? Aiding and abetting I think the Americans call it. But then Nicky is still alive so I guess you have some wiggle room there.

                Hey Matthew, when is that evidence you promised coming out regarding the $300,000 donation to Labour from Donghua Liu? I recall you spraying that one around teh internets real nice a while back. Around election time I think. Was that just lies and rumour mongering for fun or what?

                Do you still sit around thinking about how to stir up racial tensions in our country or is that passe these days? Always a handy card to play right?

                Oh dang I just remembered that I don’t actually care what a screechy irrelevant lying bottom-feeder whose bullshit artist job is ‘relating to the public’ like you thinks.

              • Murray Rawshark …
                24 April 2015 at 3:48 pm

                Shame FJK is so unlucky with the quality of his friends then, judging by Sabin, Hoskings, Hooton, and Henry.

            • emergency mike 7.1.1.2.1.3
              24 April 2015 at 12:18 pm

              “When did compare become exactly?”

              @fizzer At 10:04 when the gormless fool pulled it out. You I was just ignoring.

    • felix 7.2
      24 April 2015 at 8:53 am

      And yet it’s still all over the news in every medium.

      And so far no-one is saying it’s not a serious matter, except Mike Hosking, who looks like this: http://www.listener.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Hosking1.jpg?1ecd2e

    • repateet 7.3
      24 April 2015 at 9:08 am

      I marvel, not for first time, that Key’s biggest asset is the lack of sense of proportion of his power. Someone please send him the bumper sticker to put on his mirror, “I am not God.”

      Someone please send to his apologists and gormless sycophants, the version with the John Key photo on it with the same caption.

    • higherstandard 7.4
      24 April 2015 at 9:13 am

      Pretty much OB.

      The poor old sharks and getting tired of being hurdled.

      At least Felix is happy being given free rein to his paedophile smears, must be the most fun he’s had in years.

      • te reo putake 7.4.1
        24 April 2015 at 9:27 am

        Paedophile? You’re the first person here to raise that suggestion, HS, but I suppose you may well be correct. I don’t know whether that is really the case, but he hasn’t denied it, has he? I think the best thing would be for Key to front foot your allegation and come out and say it’s noncesense.

        • higherstandard 7.4.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 9:30 am

          No he also hasn’t denied being a reverse vampire zombie…….we’re through the looking glass here people !

          • adam 7.4.1.1.2
            24 April 2015 at 9:46 am

            Oh please, higherstandard – I think this web page has been quite honest about Key and stating his actions looking like a fetish.

            So are you saying you have evidence Key is engaged with paedophile – because I like to see you back up that claim. I have not seen anything about that – funny it coming from a Key support.

            But a fetish is a fetish, and when ones indulges in their fetish because they can from a position of power – serious questions need to be asked.

            I don’t care if the are a left wing or a right wing person in authority – using your power to indulge in a fetish at the expense of others. IS WRONG! I’m sorry you have no moral compass – but that seems to sum up this national government in that statement. A government with no morality, saying and doing the most inappropriate things – then taking it to the extreme, and in your case accusing the PM of peadophila – to cover up moral bankrupcy.

          • felix 7.4.1.1.3
            24 April 2015 at 9:47 am

            I’m glad you’re finding all this hilarious, hs, but try to keep to the topic.

            NZ’s PM enjoys caressing the hair of very young girls. That’s a documented fact.

        • TheContrarian 7.4.1.2
          24 April 2015 at 10:40 am

          “Paedophile? You’re the first person here to raise that suggestion”

          To be fair, emergency mike did compare Key to Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris and, more bizarrely, John wayne Gacy.

          • emergency mike 7.4.1.2.1
            24 April 2015 at 11:31 am

            “To be fair, emergency mike did compare Key to Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris and, more bizarrely, John wayne Gacy.”

            In as much as saying that Key’s biggest asset has always been his jokey, blokey, court jester, everyman front for his antisocial personality yes I did. Which despite the gormless fool’s fallacious objection, I meant in no way to suggest that Key is a paedophile. So I don’t really feel your offer of fairness towards higherstandard (a known tr0ll who was in fact referring to felix’s comments anyway), is well, fair to me.

            Why is Gacy a bizarre choice? He literally played the clown, joining a community club who dress up in clown costumes to entertain hospitalized kids. His neighbours described him as a friendly, social, outgoing guy who liked to kid around. You know, fun and games. They found 26 bodies under his floorboards.

            • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 7.4.1.2.1.1
              24 April 2015 at 11:44 am

              If you are not suggesting the PM is a pedophile, why compare him to pedophiles?

              • felix …
                24 April 2015 at 12:24 pm

                He compared him to other public figures who used a jokey, blokey persona to hide their unacceptable behaviour.

                Although Gacy wasn’t really a public figure in the same sense as the other three, the technique was the same. He certainly made public appearances.

                Anyway, he’s best known as a serial child murderer so your point about pedos isn’t very well made.

                • TheContrarian …
                  24 April 2015 at 12:35 pm

                  The majority of Gacy’s victims wwere between 17 – 20 years old.

                  Not really a child killer. Nor in anyway comparable to Key…

                  • felix …
                    24 April 2015 at 12:40 pm

                    Right you are, a teen killer.

                    And as I said above, no-one compared their crimes. They compared their methods of concealment.

                    • emergency mike …
                      24 April 2015 at 1:34 pm

                      Thank you felix for your comprehension skills.

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 April 2015 at 2:03 pm

                      John Wayne Gacy was the pillar of his small community and hide his tenancy to rape and murder in brutal fashion – some 26 – 33 times (actual figure unknown.

                      John Key is a PM who has seemingly has a thing for hair which he doesn’t appear to hiding in any sense of the word.

                      Not to sure on your comparison.

                    • felix …
                      24 April 2015 at 2:19 pm

                      TC does it bother you that people sometimes make comparisons between Axl Rose and Mick Jagger?

                    • TheContrarian …
                      24 April 2015 at 2:32 pm

                      They do?

                    • felix …
                      24 April 2015 at 5:46 pm

                      Sure. They’re both midgets with massive egos. They’re both great in front of their original bands but awful without them. They both have a thing for tight pants.

            • TheContrarian 7.4.1.2.1.2
              24 April 2015 at 12:32 pm

              “Why is Gacy a bizarre choice?”

              Because Gacy was a serial killer.

              • emergency mike …
                24 April 2015 at 3:01 pm

                “Key’s biggest asset has always been his jokey, blokey, court jester, everyman front for his antisocial personality. Just like Saville, Harris, and Gacy.”

                Here is what I said. If you look, you know, read it, you’ll see that I’m claiming, in my own opinion of course, that these four people have something in common.

                Big hint: It’s not paedophilia. It’s not serial killing. Obviously.

      • felix 7.4.2
        24 April 2015 at 9:31 am

        HS, are you calling me a pedo?

        I deny it.

        • higherstandard 7.4.2.1
          24 April 2015 at 9:38 am

          But can you deny that you are a cunt ?

          • adam 7.4.2.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 9:49 am

            And right there – higherstandard – shows why they just don’t understand this debate.

            • higherstandard 7.4.2.1.1.1
              24 April 2015 at 9:56 am

              This isn’t a debate you dopey twit, Felix and I are just trolling each other on a boring friday morning.

              • adam …
                24 April 2015 at 10:10 am

                I see you hubristic nature calls for personal abuse. Then let me indulge – you, you meretricious clod – any chance you could go someplace else and play out your mania.

          • felix 7.4.2.1.2
            24 April 2015 at 9:52 am

            I probably could. But first I’d check to see if there were pictures and videos of me being a cunt circulating in the news media all over the world.

            If there were, I’d get my dogs to deflect attention onto that fucking waitress and try to get on with pretending to be a war hero.

    • adam 7.5
      24 April 2015 at 9:31 am

      The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell – and head in the sand won’t help. How about you drop the whole left and right thing, and look at it objectively.

      This is a case where by a male, in a position of power, touched another human being inappropriately. Simple isn’t when you remove your fetish for politics there The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell. How about you approach it from a human perspective, but is that asking too much?

      Still want to play politics – how about. We remove the politics from this and just state it raw.

      “Older man – plays with little girls’ pony tails, on a regular basis. ”

      Feeling a little bit queasy there yet The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell? Or you’re happy to have people in power, play out power fetishes? Don’t know about you, be it left or right – people in power, abusing that power to indulge themselves – is at best – creepy, and I don’t feel we should let those people stay in positions of power and authority.

  8. just saying 8
    24 April 2015 at 8:46 am

    I think the danger in playing up this now supposed “trichophilia” and weirdness is how common this kind of behaviour is. Not hair touching in particular, but people who feel superior feeling entitled to paw those they consider their inferiors. It’s usually male to female, but isn’t exclusively. It’s about power, dominance, entitlement, about the rules of human engagement not applying. I am someone – you are no-one.

    I think It may eventually backfire for the left because the attitude of entitlement is widely accepted in the community and people see it and make excuses for it all the time. The more it is pathologised as something extreme, rather than kind of ordinary, the bigger the backlash might be. The woman who wrote about this was careful to describe the behaviour and how she felt about it in the plainest way possible, but she is likely to wear a large portion of a potential “hysteria” “overreaction” backlash.

    I guess the unknown factor in this case though, is that because the offender is PM he has a film crew or photographers recording some of his behaviour so a montage of images of some examples has been able to be created. But I’d never underestimate the power of denial.

    I also find it kind of sad that this is being turned into being about a supposed “condition”. Whether Key does or doesn’t, I couldn’t care if anyone finds hair arousing. This isn’t about that though it’s about repeately touching someone with less power against their will, in full knowledge that the touch was unwanted by the recipient. That is what is wrong here, and illegal to boot.

    • emergency mike 8.1
      24 April 2015 at 9:04 am

      If John Key has a collection of categorized locks of human hair in a locked box in his basement that he sneaks out of bed in the middle of the night to fondle and talk to, (“the boys don’t pull it do they? that’s good… that’s good…”), then that’s his business.

      But what he did to Amanda Bailey is harassment and assault. Those are what grown ups call ‘crimes’. Let’s keep the focus on the possibly criminal violation of rights that has occurred rather then Key’s latest um, endearing pathological condition.

    • Kiwiri 8.2
      24 April 2015 at 10:39 am

      it’s about repeately touching someone with less power against their will, in full knowledge that the touch was unwanted by the recipient. That is what is wrong here, and illegal to boot.

      This!

      +100

  9. Observer (Tokoroa) 9
    24 April 2015 at 8:59 am

    The incorrect handling of this “horse play” in which even little girls are assaulted by John Key, will stain the reputation of The Herald, The Editor of the Herald. the National Party …. and New Zealanders as a whole.

    We are cretins to allow ourselves to be governed and bullied by such a bad creepy sexual misfit.

  10. esoteric pineapples 10
    24 April 2015 at 9:02 am

    Re playing with young girls’ hair – Just remembered last night how I read a few years ago that in Great Britain kings used to place their feet in the lap of virgins to maintain their virility – perhaps there is some kind of ancient archetypal behaviour going on here.

    “In Welsh mythology, Math fab Mathonwy, also called Math ap Mathonwy (Math, son of Mathonwy) was a king of Gwynedd who needed to rest his feet in the lap of a virgin unless he was at war, or he would die. The story of Math is the fourth book of The Four Branches of the Mabinogi.[1]”
    Wikipeida

  11. indiana 11
    24 April 2015 at 9:05 am

    The outcome from this incident that the waitress wanted was for the PM to stop what he was doing. It did and it will never happen again. The other outcome that the waitress wanted was to reveal to all of NZ a side of the PM we would rarely see or hadn’t noticed in the past. That has been achieved too. Now, what outcome do commentators on blogs want?

    • Charles 11.1
      24 April 2015 at 9:11 am

      Change.

      Apologies, exposé, pointless without change in behaviour.

    • Raf 11.2
      24 April 2015 at 10:03 am

      What more do we want? Well, personally I would like to see this latest manifestation of Dirty Politics cleaned up. For a start, there’s the little matter of the apparent collusion between the (good-friends-of-Key) cafe owners, and (good-friend-of Key -and-cafe-owners) Rachel Glucina, and apparent cover-up by the Herald to explore??

    • BLiP 11.3
      24 April 2015 at 12:19 pm

      Now, what outcome do commentators on blogs want?

      Oh, you know, lots of little things. I mean, wouldn’t it be good if we had a Prime Minister who can get the message the first time, or if the worker’s rights to a safe workplace were being administered at Jackie Grant and Scott Brown’s rip-off coffee shops, or how about the police officers who watch the whole thing roll out and couldn’t or didn’t stop it and give John Key a warning, or how about an MSM which does not collude with the government to deceive the worker . . . you know, stuff like that. John Key’s assault has exposed a sickening attitude to women which exists across National Ltd™, the business community, and the MSM. The Human Rights Commission is going to have all sorts of interesting things to say about this, I’m sure.

      Also, its not really a matter of one outcome, how about dozens of outcomes and all of them empowering workers and women and the victims of sexual harassment. I’d settle for that.

  12. logie97 12
    24 April 2015 at 9:11 am

    … cannot imagine what might have happened if this waitress had been in her first 90 days of employment. The “victim-noble-decent-hard-working (as Hosking describes them)” cafe owners could have just dismissed her without giving any justification.

    • emergency mike 13.1
      24 April 2015 at 9:31 am

      Ouch.

    • logie97 13.2
      24 April 2015 at 9:38 am

      This cartoon brings to mind the expression – “Smiling Assassin”.
      Beneath the jokey-friendly-down-to-earth persona that the Key fan brigade keep telling us about there was apparently another trait. Wasn’t he supposed to be a pretty cut and thrust ruthless manager? Or is that a myth as well?

    • seeker 13.3
      24 April 2015 at 1:10 pm

      I knew key’s weird and upsetting behaviour reminded me of something….. creepy thin man in Charlies Angels 1.
      To see tricophilia in creepy action go to youtube.com and put “Thin man hair pull” in search. Shivers.

      *sorry can’t link at the mo.due to tablet incompetency.

  14. Tigger 14
    24 April 2015 at 9:39 am

    Some desperate reframing attempted here. http://i.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/67981132/John-Keys-ponytail-fetish-is-silly-not-bullying

    Especially the final sentence ‘There’s something reassuring about living in a country where one of the worst things you can say of your prime minister is that he is inclined to pull your hair if you have a ponytail.’

    Not even remotely true.

    • Raf 14.1
      24 April 2015 at 9:45 am

      Indeed – if Key’s behaviour was merely ‘silly’, the international press would hardly be taking such an intense interest.

    • emergency mike 14.2
      24 April 2015 at 10:00 am

      Awful apologist stuff whipped up in a hurry. The ranks are closing fast on this one. Actually it just reads like rank clickbait/flamebait tr0lling.

      Admits having been a bully himself, then reckons the hair-pulling doesn’t qualify. Hmm what’s wrong with that picture.

      Myself I can’t comprehend how this incident fails to qualify under his own definition: “Bullying is the powerful picking on those whom they think can’t and won’t fight back. It’s repeated and designed to hurt or irritate or diminish the victim.”

      • rawshark-yeshe 14.2.1
        24 April 2015 at 10:53 am

        Which part of ‘no’ does he not understand? That’s the nutshell.

        His hair fetish is creepy and an important side bar to the Amanda Bailey story. Not sure what you call it legally when it is perpetrated on young girls ? And is calling it ‘a fetish’ euphemistic and diminutising ? I honestly don’t know. But we know if it was an unknown man of his age doing this repeatedly in a public place, he would be arrested swiftly and charged with rather more than having a hair fetish. QED.)

        But Key serially aggressed upon Amanda Bailey, any fetish not included. If you didn’t read the link above to TDB posting by Burnt out teacher, take the minutes to do so. It is the perfectly clear summary of all the aspects.

      • mac1 14.3.1
        24 April 2015 at 11:52 am

        The last sentence of the editorial is very accurate, referring to John Key.

        “He has made a fool of himself, but the deeper problem is one of sheer insensitivity. He was just “horsing around”, but he failed to notice the pain he was causing.”

        And having just spent more time than I should have reading the reactions of both men and women on Facebook, the deeper problem that the editorial identifies is embedded deep within our society.

        It’s like a 1981 moment all over again, with personal harassment and abuse of personal power as the issue rather than playing rugby with a racist country- and far too many still on the side of insensitivity.

        • rawshark-yeshe 14.3.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 12:05 pm

          good comment .. but major difference from 1981 is this time Key will definitely remember where he was ! ( Yeah, right.)

      • swordfish 14.3.2
        24 April 2015 at 12:54 pm

        Dom Post Editorials have noticeably improved since the last Election.

  15. Joe Jones 15
    24 April 2015 at 10:41 am

    Agreed. I always knew he was a pervert after seeing him at the Big Gay Out hanging out and fawning over all the other [r0b: hate speech deleted]

  16. SMILIN 16
    24 April 2015 at 10:55 am

    7 months he has been at it whats wrong with the cafe owners apart from the adolescent behavior of twerp JK with his degenerate mental state driven by his obvious need for a clip around the ears back dated to the laws that would apply to him when he was a teenager .
    Now he mite get a pill to rearrange his thinking.

  17. Puckish Rogue 17
    24 April 2015 at 11:06 am

    Bit rich of the Italian and American press to go on about this, Key hardly compares to some of their illustrious leaders

    • tc 17.1
      24 April 2015 at 11:13 am

      It’s called journalism something you haven’t seen much of in this country

    • emergency mike 17.2
      24 April 2015 at 11:38 am

      And the British press, and the Canadian press, and the Brazilian press, and the Spanish press, and the Australian press, and………

    • Sabine 17.3
      24 April 2015 at 11:55 am

      Consent, mate you are missing it again.

      Mrs. Lewinsky consented to the blow job.
      Mr. Berlusconi got laid with the consent of the Ladies…maybe he paid a bit to get the constent but they said yes.

      Dear Leader, our most magnificent Ponytail Puller on the other hand does it without the explicit content of the one having the hair tugged and fondled.

      Consent……You know….Yes, Dear Leader please tug my Ponytail, fondly my Pig tails, and caress my silky hair. He did not have it.
      and that makes the action wrong, morally and also illegally. And no it wont go away.

  18. Iron Sky 18
    24 April 2015 at 11:45 am

    The NOT EVEN WRONG PR Approach and Ponytails

    Unfortunately I listened to I think Irene Gardiner (Content Director, NZ On Screen) on RNZ Jim Moras show + Ali Pugh (TV One’s Breakfast programme).

    Both these lovely ladies think hair pulling is ok (without stating it) because that’s what’s normal, it’s either happened to them and/or they know people it’s happened to……..

    Their argument is SO WRONG, ITs NOT EVEN WRONG

    This is a tactic used by suck ups, schmoooooooozer wannabes (PR people – say like Henry, Hoskins) that typically get high paid jobs so they can hang out with people who actually have talent. They hate to use statistics and real facts

    They are soooo gutless they stick to the phrase “Not even wrong”

    “It describes any argument that purports to be scientific but fails at some fundamental level, usually in that it contains a terminal logical fallacy or it cannot be falsified by experiment (i.e. tested with the possibility of being rejected), or cannot be used to make predictions about the natural world.

    The phrase is generally attributed to theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or sloppy thinking.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

    So, Irene and Ali, can we come pull your hair (why stop at hair)?

    Gosh maybe they could get some statistics behind their little schmooze BS, oh that’s right your arses are stuck to the seats because your to busy sucking up.

    Here’s a starter for 10…. actually their must be better stats than this… it took no effort.

    Sexual harassment suffered by HALF female workforce – while 40% say they have been touched inappropriately by colleagues

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2151169/Sexual-harrassment-time-high-40-women-say-inappropriately-touched-colleagues.html

    • Iron Sky 18.1
      24 April 2015 at 11:56 am

      So, for brevity, what am I saying to Irene Gardiner (Content Director, NZ On Screen) on RNZ Jim Moras show + Ali Pugh (TV One’s Breakfast programme):

      They give the appearance of fence sitting (to Joe public, so you can remain nice and clean like PR vestle virgins) yet in reality your arses are so firmly planted in Keys Hawii lawn you will start shooting roots.

      GUTLESS wannabes

    • Sabine 18.2
      24 April 2015 at 12:04 pm

      The very sad sad thing is that alot of women have had their hair pulled.

      Once upon a time i was about to leave my boyfriend of a few years cause life happens. When I told him I was moving out, he grabbed me by the hair and started jerking my head around, shoving me to the ground and dragging me around by my hair.

      As a consequence i had my hair cut. Short, very very short. Aint no one gonna pull me and jerk me around by my hair. I had short hair for over 10 years, and only now have grow it long again.

      I absolutely believe the two when they say it happened to them, and that they consider it normal. There is a lot of beauty and sensually attached to long hair on women, i.e. all short hair ladies are lesbians etc etc , or maybe even the Samson legend, the strength of a person is in the hair, or even in Islam, where the hair needs to be covered so as to not arouse strange man.

      It is just sad, that they still don’t dare speak up and denounce the man that do it, and because of it, their daughters will most likely at some stage in their lives encounter someone who will pull their hair, rip out their hair, cut their hair, or drag them around by their hair.

      Violence against women and girls does not only come with black eyes, sometimes it just comes with ripped out hair, bold spots, blood on the scalp and a headache not from this world.

      • Iron SKy 18.2.1
        24 April 2015 at 12:38 pm

        Sabine, nicely balanced post.

        The problem I think is that we have a PR machine so lacking in credibility (i.e. they manipulate based on emotions). It is so skewed to the supporting JKs machine.

        The scary thing its made its way into the public broadcasters.

        Take TVNZ….One News last night:

        A “serial” litigator is taking JK to court for the ponytail pulling

        What connotations does the word serial have in your mind….positive or negative? Why does litigator need the prefix “serial”. Maybe TVNZ and the head of news does not like trouble makers……..

        If where using the word serial who should it most be associated with? (not that it should be used at all yet)

        On a personal note, and whats been said time and time again…. the consent of the person is required.

        • Tigger 18.2.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 2:08 pm

          Sabine, I don’t understand why this has not been tagged as ‘assault’ and treated as such. It’s physical violence. Not horseplay. Not ‘a bit of fun’. I can only assume misogyny and sexism are the reason it seems to be acceptable to some.

          The whole thing has made me sick, sick of Key, sick of the attitudes that have allowed him to keep getting away with such behaviour.

  19. freedom 19
    24 April 2015 at 11:55 am

    This needs much wider exposure

    “she refused to comment on issues of women’s rights in the workplace. ” http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/67981595/Minister-for-Women-standing-by-Prime-Minister-after-ponytail-incident

    • rawshark-yeshe 19.2
      24 April 2015 at 12:15 pm

      must feel odd to be paragon of absolutely nothing …. hollow woman …. deserves a question directly to her when parliament resumes.

    • rawshark-yeshe 19.3
      24 April 2015 at 12:28 pm

      Jan Logie has it covered .. hope she nails Upston in the House …

      https://blog.greens.org.nz/2015/04/24/minister-for-who-women-or-team-key/

      • freedom 19.3.1
        24 April 2015 at 12:41 pm

        Carter will have something lined up to excuse whatever non-answer eventuates

        • rawshark-yeshe 19.3.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 12:45 pm

          lol but I wish it wasn’t. I read he is in line to take over from Lockwood in London .. so who becomes next Speaker ?

          • Matthew Hooton 19.3.1.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 12:48 pm

            Speculation is Brownlee

            • rawshark-yeshe 19.3.1.1.1.1
              24 April 2015 at 12:52 pm

              oh, baby cheeses.

            • freedom 19.3.1.1.1.2
              24 April 2015 at 12:52 pm

              😯 then it really is time the position becomes ‘independant’ and no elected representative ever gets near the chair again

              how? off the top of my head – maybe each elected party – regardless of number of MP’s -gets one vote on candidates which can be presented by each party in the House and the voting continues until a majority decision is reached?

              • rawshark-yeshe …
                24 April 2015 at 1:03 pm

                one vote on the whole field of candidates, or one vote per each candidate to be used or withheld??

                • freedom …
                  24 April 2015 at 1:16 pm

                  have to get ready for physio but before i run out the door

                  each party in the House presents a candidate
                  all parties get one vote per candidate
                  – withheld votes could happen if they choose but can’t see why they would?
                  I guess Act would if told to 🙂

                  another (better?) system might be all candidates get pooled with an STV vote by the parties for ranking preferences and also the deputy etc can be chosen from the remainder of the STV result

                  hope that make sense, 🙂

            • RedLogix 19.3.1.1.1.3
              24 April 2015 at 1:05 pm

              From Jan Logies presser above:

              I find it deeply disturbing to see the weight of National party PR machine all lined up against one young woman. That just doesn’t sit right with me at all.

              Nor me either. The original incident reflects poor judgement and behaviour on Key’s part. And if we take his acknowledgment and apology at face value – the matter would stand alone for the electorate to make it’s own mind up about.

              But first of all the craven betrayal by Amanda’s employers and the Herald.

              And now the sickening parade of sycophants all piling on to assure us that either it’s all a big nothing in her little head and how they’d just love to have John Key gently tug their hair.

              At what point is some grown up in the Key team going to say enough?

            • Skinny 19.3.1.1.1.4
              24 April 2015 at 6:03 pm

              Question time will become a right circus with that clown fronting as speaker. Peters would be rubbing his hands at the thought of making a mockery of Brownlee, it would become amateur hour.

            • SMILIN 19.3.1.1.1.5
              24 April 2015 at 8:08 pm

              Speculum mite be closer to his mental state

  20. Stickler 20
    24 April 2015 at 12:33 pm

    What has this Minister of Women’s Affairs achieved for women?
    What has this Minister of Tourism done for tourism, except to Hawaii?
    What has this Minister for the Environment done to the environment (because he’s done precious little FOR it)?

    And so on and so forth.

    How did we get a government that has created so many anti-ministries?

    • Corokia 20.1
      24 April 2015 at 1:31 pm

      Well said Stickler!
      I’d like to add a Minister of Health who tells the parents of injured children to drive them around town looking for a doctor without an ACC surcharge.
      And as for the Minister and Associate Minister of Climate change issues!!

    • Murray Rawshark 20.2
      24 April 2015 at 4:28 pm

      Ironically, it all started in 1984. Either the book, or the first ACT government. Both fit the bill for anti-ministries.

  21. felix 21
    24 April 2015 at 12:38 pm

    All this talk about whether John Key is a pedophile or not is, IMHO, going a bit far.

    Sure, caressing, fondling, and gently tugging at hair has an obvious sexual element to it.

    And if someone gains sexual gratification from caressing, fondling, and gently tugging at the hair of very young girls, it probably is cause for serious concern about that person.

    But without knowing the precise medical, psychological, or legal definitions of pedophilia, it’s probably not appropriate to throw such words around willy-nilly.

    After all, that’s the kind of thing John Key does, and he’s a fucking weirdo who I wouldn’t let babysit my cat.

    • TheContrarian 21.1
      24 April 2015 at 12:41 pm

      What Felix said. Also comparing him to notorious serial killers is kinda off also.

      • RedLogix 21.1.1
        24 April 2015 at 12:54 pm

        Agreed totally – the ‘pedo-word’ gets mis-used far too often.

        And besides – I doubt your cat would put up with much shit either 🙂

        • rawshark-yeshe 21.1.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 1:06 pm

          so do we have an appropriate word for a hair fetishist acting out on young children ? happy to use it, but never as a baby sitter for my cat either.

        • felix 21.1.1.2
          24 April 2015 at 1:17 pm

          My cat is a dog 😀

          • rawshark-yeshe 21.1.1.2.1
            24 April 2015 at 1:37 pm

            😀

          • freedom 21.1.1.2.2
            24 April 2015 at 6:51 pm

            it’s been gnawing at me
            ?
            Your ‘cat’ is a dog.
            Or your cat thinks it’s a dog

            • felix 21.1.1.2.2.1
              24 April 2015 at 8:01 pm

              Haha the first one.

              But she does chase rats and mice. And my friend once spent a couple of months training her to come running when he called “here kitty kitty kitty”.

    • Pasupial 21.2
      24 April 2015 at 1:28 pm

      Hebephilia would be a better term than pedophilia (perhaps where the phrase; “hebe jeebies”, came from?):

      Hebephilia is the primary or exclusive adult sexual interest in pubescent individuals approximately 11–14 years old, and is one of several types of chronophilia (a sexual preference for a specific physiological appearance related to age). It differs from ephebophilia, which is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction to those in later adolescence, approximately 15–19 years old,[1][2] and differs from pedophilia,[2] which is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebephilia

      However, neither term fits the Creepy Key exactly, as there it does not seem to be his; “primary or exclusive adult sexual interest”. It is the power imbalance that is most unsettling, that he focuses his tugging attention on those who are unable to resist. Abusive and creepy seems to cover it.

      On a slightly unrelated note, while I have the definition up. NZ has become increasingly seen as a haven for ephebophiles in recent years. Part of this is the 16 year age of consent in this country (compared to 18 in much of USA), but that’s still higher than much of South America. Perhaps has something to do with Canada (and other countries) raising their age of consent to 16 too. The age for prostitution here is 18, but this is not always observed. What this has to do with the culture of greed that has flourished under Key’s government, I couldn’t say.

    • Huginn 21.3
      24 April 2015 at 2:19 pm

      Agree.
      Tousling kids’ hair, kissing babies, being a patronising coot – all part of the job of being a politician, more so for Prime Minister.

      But it has to stop when they signal that they don’t like it – and Key doesn’t appear to have got that message, even after his wife confirmed it.

      That’s a problem

      • felix 21.3.1
        24 April 2015 at 2:27 pm

        Oh don’t get me wrong, I think Key’s behaviour toward children goes WAY beyond what is normal “tousling” even for a patronising politician, as evidenced by the many many clips and pics that have been shared here over the last couple of days.

        There’s no doubt in my mind that he has some kind of unmanaged compulsion to play with hair and that it is sexual in nature, and the fact that he uses very young girls for this gratification is extremely disturbing.

        I just think it’s too far a leap, on the evidence available, to label him a pedophile.

        • RedLogix 21.3.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 6:51 pm

          On the evidence available I’d suggest it’s just a habit Key has gotten into. It’s a tough damn world he lives in and he’s human too. Just reaching out briefly to touch something innocent might make him feel a little better about himself.

          I wouldn’t label it intentionally sexual or an active act of bullying – more like something he found some small pleasure in and nobody around him has had the courage to tell him he should stop.

          At a personal level I’m not overly exercised by Key’s motives, even if tugging on ponytails is something the vast majority of people clearly understand is wrong. It’s not a major wrong; it’s a bit like farting in a crowded lift. Maybe you can get away with it once or twice. But repeatedly and deliberately doing AFTER you’ve been told to stop becomes anti-social.

          But he IS our Prime Minister – and that role comes with an onerous duty of care to exercise the power inherent in that role with decorum and circumspection. Persistent anti-social behaviour is inconsistent with holding that job.

          Far worse still has been the response of the NACT dirty politics machine attacking and smearing Amanda Bailey. Frankly someone grown up in New Zealand needs to make it stop.

          • felix 21.3.1.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 7:12 pm

            Yeah I don’t know what they’re thinking. Is there any universe where it gets better for them by carrying on with attacking the victim? Especially when Key has admitted everything?

            Maybe they can’t turn the machine off any more.

            Maybe Collins is driving…

          • marty mars 21.3.1.1.2
            24 April 2015 at 7:47 pm

            I’m quite sad to read your comment red, but not surprised. If as you say the vast majority of people consider it wrong as in creepy wrong somehow you think it’s not a major wrong? maybe you have been out of the country too long and you’ve become influenced by our oz cousins and their famous enlightened attitudes /sarc. And this ‘antisocial’ angle – I say wtf to that. It is abuse of power and position, it is continuing to touch someone without their permission AND after they have said no and that to you is antifuckingsocial – I say again W.T.F. It is illegal!!! You cannot touch ANYONE without their permission – end of story.

            “Just reaching out briefly to touch something innocent might make him feel a little better about himself.”

            That sentence scares me – do you really think people think like that? It is imo dangerous assumption and assertion to make.

            • greywarshark 21.3.1.1.2.1
              24 April 2015 at 7:56 pm

              It’s being handled, touched doen’t convey the situation as well I think.
              Who wants to be handled, patted, pulled about? Even your dog and cat will tire of it.

              And I don’t think NZs are a ‘touchy’ people. So that making contact is even more distasteful. There has been a man in the workplace who made a complaint about his woman boss patting him on the bum I think, and he didn’t like it. Really it lacks respect for the other’s right as an individual. It is just not done to handle, touch, stroke anyone or anything except to show a certain proprietorship, which does not apply in this case.

            • RedLogix 21.3.1.1.2.2
              24 April 2015 at 8:44 pm

              @mm
              I think you have to accept that when it comes to personal space and touching – people do differ quite a lot in what is acceptable to them. Which is partly why the general public are reacting so diversely to this issue.

              The crime of assault ranges from technical assaults that happen in a crowded train or bus right through to beating someone to within a inch of their life. This covers a very wide range of possible scenarios from quite minor offenses to very major ones indeed.

              While technically all non-consenting touch is illegal, in practise we accept there is a minimum threshold below which you are very unlikely to be charged or convicted. The primary considerations as to which side of this threshold an assault may fall are:

              1. The physical severity
              2. Intent
              3. Repetition
              4. Continuing when asked to stop
              5. The perceived degree of offense by the victim
              6. Degree of power differential

              Malicious or criminal intent in this case, which I was speaking to above, is hard to demonstrate and the actual physical severity is pretty modest in the wider scale of things.

              Of course many people are looking at only this consideration and on that basis conclude it’s not a big deal. Move on they say. And they are of course wrong because they are deliberately omitting the other aspects of what was happening.

              My comment above that you have been so saddened by was only reflecting on the intent aspect. At this point there is no evidence to support a malicious or perverse intent on Key’s part. Imply that is an overreach. And a counterproductive one at that.

              Having said this, this case does clearly tick the other four boxes. If it does arrive in Court it is entirely possible Key will be convicted. On the scale of criminal offenses it will be treated as a relatively minor matter, although politically it would be an earthquake and the end of Key’s government.

              Between us I think we could both agree that this is neither a trifle, nor a major offense. It lies somewhere in the anti-social shades of grey. You and I would likely not pick the exact same shade of grey – but I’d not want to quibble over it.

              • Clemgeopin …
                24 April 2015 at 9:02 pm

                Excellent comment!

              • marty mars …
                24 April 2015 at 9:59 pm

                Red your first sentence says it all – “what is acceptable to them” as demonstrated by permission. That is the key point (intended).

                You do not have any idea of his intent any more than I but what I conclude after seeing each and every example, and there are many documented examples not just the particular series of incidents written up by the brave young woman who asked key to stop touching her hair, is an intent that is not benign or rather is directed for the full benefit of key without consideration of the person whose hair he touches. That is totally unacceptable and illegal imo. You cannot deliberately touch someone without their permission – I’m sure the same shade of grey applies on that one for both of us.

                • RedLogix …
                  24 April 2015 at 10:55 pm

                  In most situations people do not actually ask for permission before they touch. They don’t say “Is it ok to shake hands?” Or “Can I hongi you?”.

                  Instead it is the context or body language that speaks to consent. You put your hand out, I reach out to meet it. Nothing said, but consent all the same. Many social situations are similar.

                  As I’ve said below, Key wrongly assumed unspoken consent because he imagined from his perspective that everyone was enjoying themselves. People do tease and bounce off each other all the time. “Giving each other shit” is a way of life in many workplaces. Of course it’s a balancing act between pointed fun and nasty bullying. This can all go badly wrong when there are mismatched perceptions and levels of experience. As is clearly the case here.

                  Key should have damn well known better. Of course his behaviour was unacceptable in this instance. And technically illegal too. (Just as Helen Clark committed a technical fraud when she signed that damned painting.) Whether it rises to the level actual criminality is harder to tell. If it ever gets to a Court we may well find out.

                  • marty mars …
                    24 April 2015 at 11:36 pm

                    bill covers it very well below

                    and in addition – hair is very personal and key by touching someones hair created a sexual connotation in the incident which when combined with the ginormous power imbalance and the fact he continued when asked to stop totally equals abuse. The handshake and hongi examples are red herrings.

                    • RedLogix …
                      25 April 2015 at 12:28 am

                      The handshake and hongi are relevant because they are excellent examples of implied, non-verbal consent. As with almost all other normal, acceptable instances of touching – consent is implied and non-verbal. Which is of course how it is possible to get it wrong.

                      Touching hair is I agree normally off-limits, especially so for Maori and Pasifika. But then again parents will often stroke or caress the hair of their children. Hairdressers and lovers are allowed to touch our hair. It’s not an absolute prohibition.

                      For the most part I’d suggest the overseas media have hit the right note; Key has made a fool of himself by totally misreading the cues, arrogantly assuming his own entitlement and behaving like a jerk. Many people who have been on the wrong end of this kind of behaviour recognise it straight away. This affair has cost Key a great deal of political teflon. But it will not by itself (unless more information comes to light) bring about the end of his political career. I think we should be realistic about this.

                      Part of me is also naturally wary when I see big black words like rapist, pedophile, abuser and bully being stretched out and flung over the colourful spectrum of human fallibilities. By always casting the debate into stark, binary blacks or whites – we get flung between outrage and apathy. As a political dialect it’s not especially honest and it’s certainly not very effective.

                    • felix …
                      25 April 2015 at 4:47 am

                      Touching hair is I agree normally off-limits, especially so for Maori and Pasifika. But then again parents will often stroke or caress the hair of their children. Hairdressers and lovers are allowed to touch our hair. It’s not an absolute prohibition.

                      Hmm, that doesn’t make it any better for Key though.

                      I don’t believe he thinks he’s touching his own child’s hair. And he’s not a hairdresser, he’s a licensed building practicioner.

                      So that just leaves lover.

                    • RedLogix …
                      25 April 2015 at 9:59 am

                      But nor is there any need to make this worse than it is. As I suggested the other day John Armstrong makes for an interesting read this morning:

                      Quite simply, there has been nothing on a par in New Zealand politics as his bizarre and grotesque hair pulling.

                      The country has barely begun to come to terms with Key’s contribution to the Theatre of the Absurd, with views varying from seeing the fuss as utterly trivial to being comparable to a war crime, depending on your definition of what constitutes common assault.

                      Such is the state of public denial that this prime minister of all prime ministers could have a foible as weird as this has people desperately trying to find the funny side, hoping in the meantime that it was all a very bad dream.

                      It wasn’t. As for Key, he will be lucky to escape from this nightmare without his reputation being severely dented, his credibility considerably drained and his authority greatly diminished.

                      Looking on the bright side, the whole unseemly episode has shown Key to be human after all. And many will rejoice at that as they determine that the invective raining down on him is a massive and unwarranted over-reaction by the liberal establishment.

          • Bill 21.3.1.1.3
            24 April 2015 at 8:03 pm

            Red.

            Key’s world is a lot less tough than the world most people have to cope with.

            Touching someone (not ‘something’) innocent for gratification is not okay. Not without their express consent.

            It isn’t up to those around him (spouse, security detail or who-ever) to ‘police’ his behaviour. It should not be necessary.

            Expressing power through invasive behaviour, be it hair tugging or any other way, is not akin to farting in a lift.

            • RedLogix 21.3.1.1.3.1
              24 April 2015 at 8:59 pm

              Your lecture Bill is entirely wasted. At no point did I express or imply that what Key was doing was OK. Reflecting on what might be the motive or reward for his behaviour is NOT the same as justifying it.

              You know much better than this and you owe me an apology.

              • Bill …
                24 April 2015 at 9:34 pm

                It wasn’t a lecture, more a bullet pointing of the obvious. And yeah, I acknowledge that my time is probably being wasted. but for the two minutes of however many I left on this earth…

                ‘it’s just a habit’.
                ‘It’s a tough damn world he lives in’.
                ‘Just (as in ‘only’?) reaching out briefly to touch something…’
                ‘I wouldn’t label it intentionally sexual or an active act of bullying’
                ‘It’s not a major wrong; it’s a bit like farting in a crowded lift. Maybe you can get away with it once or twice.’
                ‘..becomes anti-social.’
                ‘Persistent anti-social behaviour is inconsistent with holding that job.’
                ‘Far worse still has been… ‘

                Now. Where in any of that did you say that what he did was okay?

                Where did I say you said it was okay? (Closest I can see is where I state that, sans permission/consent, touching someone (not ‘thing’) for some level of personal gratification is not okay)

                Where in your comment did you miss the prescient point, minimise what he did, push it down a league table of wrong-doing or remove the human element altogether?

                edit. Christ. Another two minutes gone on an edit in relation to your follow up comment to martymars.

                “I think you have to accept that when it comes to personal space and touching – people do differ quite a lot in what is acceptable to them.’

                Missing the point, which is…deliberate actions playing out in another’s personal space (on their body) without their consent… One response. The only response. No. Verbotten. (sp?)

                • RedLogix …
                  24 April 2015 at 10:31 pm

                  All that is perfectly true in a purist, puritanical sense.

                  But the real world is more complex than this. If the ‘deliberate action playing out my personal space’ puts me in hospital for six months, consent or otherwise is an entirely mute point.

                  But traverse down the spectrum of physical touching to a pat, a hand holding , an elbow nudge or ‘playful’ stroke of the hair – and implied or perceived consent comes into play.

                  For instance a handshake implies active, if unspoken, mutual consent. A colleague giving me a pat on the back for a job well done (happened to me yesterday) also carries implied consent. Someone nudging me in a meeting to get my attention seems ok too.

                  And I recall one occasion when a woman stroked my hair in order to get my attention in the most welcome manner possible. Or at a funeral and emotions are raw – hands get held and shoulders hugged.

                  Of course no-one asks for explicit consent in any of those scenarios. It’s mostly assumed. It would be a much colder world if we all stopped reaching out to each other for fear that our motives will always be interpreted in the worst fashion possible.

                  And that is of course where Key went badly wrong – he assumed consent when he should have known there was none. Especially after being asked to stop it. On the other hand he is no fool and has promptly accepted he was wrong. I doubt very much if we will see a repeat hair stroking moment from him ever again.

                  If you want to interpret this as minimising or somehow diminishing the magnitude of the offense in your mind – then there is no helping that. If you want to see Key’s government brought down over this matter – there will be no gainsaying your outrage.

                  But the wider public will be making up their own minds. There will be many, women especially, who will forever see Key in a much less flattering light from now on. And the grotesque spectacle of the dirty politics machine turning on one young woman who had the guts to threaten Brand Key – is something once seen will never be forgotten.

                  • Olwyn …
                    24 April 2015 at 11:02 pm

                    In all this dissecting of Key’s deed in order to determine its degree of badness, your most important is getting lost: Far worse still has been the response of the NACT dirty politics machine attacking and smearing Amanda Bailey. Frankly someone grown up in New Zealand needs to make it stop.

                    There is more to the dirty politics machine than attacking perceived opponents, bad as that is. It is part of a sort of “governance by clique”, raddled with the worst of bad faith. The way Amanda’s employers ganged up with the clique to shut her down shows precisely why she could not sort out her grievance ordinarily, within the workplace. Moreover, Key probably felt free to tease her, which is what he would have thought he was doing, because he thought he was safe in a ‘clique’ cafe. This sort of in-group thing is toxic, especially in politics where you are meant to govern for all. It is held together by fear, favour and contempt for outsiders. When her employers set out to compromise her they probably expected her compliance because they thought she would fear being cast out of the hallowed in-group.

                    • RedLogix …
                      24 April 2015 at 11:09 pm

                      Moreover, Key probably felt free to tease her, which is what he would have thought he was doing, because he thought he was safe in a ‘clique’ cafe.

                      Yes that expresses it well. It goes a long way to explaining what to most of us here seems otherwise inexplicable.

                  • Bill …
                    24 April 2015 at 11:03 pm

                    For instance a handshake implies active, if unspoken, mutual consent.

                    Nope. It’s a definite interaction. You can’t shake my hand unless I’m shaking yours too.

                    A colleague giving me a pat on the back for a job well done (happened to me yesterday) also carries implied consent.

                    You may be happy with ‘pats on the back’, but depending on person and circumstance, I’ve considered it a piece of patronising crap and gotten well fucked off.

                    Someone nudging me in a meeting to get my attention seems ok too.

                    Are they taking anything or running an agenda? Probably not. Probably neutral. No power at play.

                    And I recall one occasion when a woman stroked my hair in order to get my attention in the most welcome manner possible.

                    That’s flirting or whatever and fine when both people are engaged in that space.

                    Or at a funeral and emotions are raw – hands get held and shoulders hugged

                    And no agendas here either (usually).

                    It would be a much colder world if we all stopped reaching out to each other for fear that our motives will always be interpreted in the worst fashion possible

                    Indeed it would. But I’m assuming when you talk of ‘reaching out’ that you’re talking of sharing or giving as opposed to taking, yes? ie – What you’re not talking about is ‘reaching out for ourselves’?

                    And that is of course where Key went badly wrong – he assumed consent…

                    Boom! That’s the shit right there…the power at play. What was he giving? What was he sharing? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. A prick intent on taking what he wanted/needed/craved or whatever, and assuming it would be fine/thinking nothing of it.

                    In a word: Abuse.

    • aj 21.4
      24 April 2015 at 2:22 pm

      Felix @ 12:38

      Look up the symptoms of tricophillia. Your third para becomes very relevant.

      To consider ‘it’s ok’ to touch the hair or an adult stranger, let alone a young person, shows a complete disconnect with knowing what is right and what is not right.

      Having learn over the last 10 or 15 years, replace John Key in those photos with a member of the Clergy. What would the Michelle Boag, Mike Hosking, and Clare Robinson’s of this world reaction be? The same as most of the people commenting here.

    • Lanthanide 21.5
      24 April 2015 at 8:09 pm

      Hah, I remember sometime around the start of last year there was a survey (I hesitate to call it a poll) about trustworthiness of politicians, and whether you’d trust them to babysit your children or not. John Key came out highest for that one.

      I wonder where he’d sit now.

  22. Roflcopter 22
    24 April 2015 at 1:33 pm

    TravellerEv’s rantings are more plausible than the bunch of fuckwits on here trying to frame Key as a sexual predator.

    What a bunch of sick fucks.

    • rawshark-yeshe 22.1
      24 April 2015 at 1:43 pm

      Therefore Key is a ‘sick fuck’ as he is the only one framing himself.

      The debate is useful imho. You do have the non-abusive option to ignore it.

    • Colonial Rawshark 22.2
      24 April 2015 at 5:59 pm

      What a bunch of sick fucks.

      So how would you describe a 50 year old man who enjoys playing with school girl hair?

  23. Clemgeopin 23
    24 April 2015 at 2:31 pm

    The valueless, dis-honourable, backside-protecting, gutless female National cabinet Ministers are closing ranks around John Key! None of them deserve to be re-elected again!

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/68007208/female-ministers-close-ranks-around-ponytailpulling-prime-minister

    • Colonial Rawshark 23.1
      24 April 2015 at 6:01 pm

      Careerism beats decency, even amongst these powerful women.

      • greywarshark 23.1.1
        24 April 2015 at 6:52 pm

        Colonial R
        Women are not immune to the old adage ‘Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’ The asperashunal women are no more moral and empathetic than men, they jettison their piece of empathetic brain in favour of expansion of the calculating part.

  24. ankerawshark 24
    24 April 2015 at 3:16 pm

    O.k. I like many women have had to put up with unwanted touching in the work place by men who had more power than me. And this issue makes me so angry.

    I have thought of writing to the Mins of Women’s Affairs, petitions etc…………and I just think I have had a gutsful.

    My latest is idea is that everywhere John K goes, so go a bunch of women with placards saying “serial puller of young girls hair…..yuk!!!!” Keep away from our girls John.

    I think its time to keep this issue alive in the minds of NZders.

  25. ankerawshark 25
    24 April 2015 at 3:17 pm

    O.k. I like many women have had to put up with unwanted touching in the work place by men who had more power than me. And this issue makes me so angry.

    I have thought of writing to the Mins of Women’s Affairs, petitions etc…………and I just think I have had a gutsful.

    My latest is idea is that everywhere John K goes, so go a bunch of women with placards saying “serial puller of young girls hair…..yuk!!!!” Keep away from our girls John.

    I think its time to keep this issue alive in the minds of NZders.

    “please go and get your fetish problem treated. You are no longer fit to be PM”

    Wear him down.

    • Colonial Rawshark 25.1
      24 April 2015 at 5:38 pm

      My latest is idea is that everywhere John K goes, so go a bunch of women with placards saying “serial puller of young girls hair…..yuk!!!!” Keep away from our girls John.

      “Keep your hands to yourself” is a great line.

  26. Pascals bookie 26
    24 April 2015 at 4:39 pm

    Knowing how much RWers really hate hypocrisy, even when they have to imagine it exists in the form of hypothetical hypocrisy*, I’ll just leave this here, from Toby manhire’s herald piece today:

    “You may say elected politicians should “treat people with respect”, that “you earn respect as a member of Parliament, you don’t get respect because you’re there, you have to earn it because other people think you deserve it”, adding that his behaviour “doesn’t deserve respect as a member of Parliament, so he’s let himself down very badly, and the institution”. And if you did, you’d be quoting verbatim the Prime Minister’s words before Aaron “Utu” Gilmore felt obliged to resign his seat having behaved like a prat to a waiter.

    You may, equally, remind the Prime Minister of his words from late last year: “There’s always a risk with third-term governments they get arrogant. There’s always a risk that they veer off into a space they haven’t been, and start surprising their supporters”, which is why you “won’t be wanting to see any hint of arrogance creeping in” and “it’s incredibly important National stays connected with supporters and connected with the New Zealand public”, adding that you assume he didn’t mean manually connecting with the New Zealand public through the backs of their heads.”

    * You know the routine, “If It was a Liabor MP what did it Liabour would be saying a different thing so they are hypocrits and I hates hypocrits and that’s why I hate Liabores!”

  28. idlegus 28
    24 April 2015 at 4:59 pm

    “Mr Key apologised for his behaviour by sending two bottles of pinot noir to Ms Bailey and later accepted that it was not appropriate in hindsight and that he thought it was in the “context of practical jokes”.” Corin Dann. So now he ‘sent’ 2 bottles of wine I’m sure initially the story was he dropped them off personally? Also the Reuters page has a Key quote ‘I apologised immediately’.

    • Clemgeopin 28.1
      24 April 2015 at 5:07 pm

      May be Corin Dann got it wrong? Do you have a link?

    • rawshark-yeshe 28.2
      24 April 2015 at 5:11 pm

      might be an honest mistake by Dann .. he is travelling in Key’s NZ party to Turkey … just a thought. He is usually accurate if a bit biased.

        • Clemgeopin 28.2.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 6:55 pm

          From the link:

          Amanda Bailey, the waitress, likened John Key’s behaviour to “school yard bullying” and said she felt powerless and humiliated.

          In the wake of the revelations, many prominent people and groups have weighed in, mostly in defence of Ms Bailey and ridiculing the Prime Minister.

          Political analyst Bryce Edwards told TV ONE’s Breakfast programme yesterday that Mr Key may struggle to recover from damages incurred by his ponytail tugging.

          “A lot of people will be laughing at John Key, that’s harder to recover from,” Mr Edwards said.

  29. ianmac 29
    24 April 2015 at 5:13 pm

    Remember that it is wrong in Polynesian families for an adult, say a teacher to touch anyone on the head. Like not sitting on a table. Taboo.

  30. fisiani 30
    24 April 2015 at 6:20 pm

    It was not NOT abusive , creepy , sleazy paedo, or sexual or an assault. Must be a quiet time in NZ. The Key Derangement Syndrome exposed here is quite astonishing. Get some perspective. Silly high jinks taken the wrong way and apologised for ages ago. Get over it and hopefully your symptoms will settle.

    • RedLogix 30.1
      24 April 2015 at 6:30 pm

      Just answer one question. Do you think John Key would have done this to a grown man?

      • Chooky 30.1.1
        24 April 2015 at 6:34 pm

        …no because he would have been boxed in the nose and flattened…particularly if he persisted, then he probably would have had his teeth knocked out …and particularly if he did it to an All Black, that he so likes to pose on the covers of magazines with

        ….in fact an All Black would not have done this to a waitress once…let alone repeatedly….they would have been severely reprimanded and taken to task publically

        …why do some think it is acceptable for John Key?…that is the real question?….New Zealand is not a Banana Republic yet!

        …imo…time for decent Nacts to jump ship to NZF

        • Kriss X 30.1.1.1
          24 April 2015 at 6:43 pm

          No. An All Black would have had court ordered name suppression, even for serious sexual assaults etc.

          Nothing is allowed to tarnish the name of those thugs.

          • Chooky 30.1.1.1.1
            24 April 2015 at 6:53 pm

            hmmm…well i was thinking of nice All Blacks…I have to admit I dont follow rugby, so you are probably correct in some cases unfortunately

      • fender 30.1.2
        24 April 2015 at 6:57 pm

        Ask Peter Dunne or Pita Sharples..

      • fisiani 30.1.3
        24 April 2015 at 8:08 pm

        A grown man with a ponytail????

      • Alpha z 30.1.4
        24 April 2015 at 8:54 pm

        why do u rekon peter dunne is in keys cabnet then ye?

    • freedom 30.2
      24 April 2015 at 6:46 pm

      Under the grandeur of the Egyptian twilight, the river flowed with abandon as fisiani plaited his navel lint.

    • Draco T Bastard 30.3
      24 April 2015 at 6:59 pm

      It was not NOT abusive , creepy , sleazy paedo, or sexual or an assault.

      Yes it was. How do we know this? Because the victim of the sexual assault said so.

      But I can’t say that I’m surprised to see you in here defending such indefensible behaviour. It’s what RWNJs do – they defend their leaders no matter what they do making them just as bad, if not worse, than the person that they’re trying hard to defend.

      To put it another way: JK behaved sociopathically and you’re being sociopathic by defending him.

    • ankerawshark 30.4
      24 April 2015 at 8:10 pm

      Fisiani. That’s what you and the likes of Mike H hope for.

      Technically its assault.

    • ropata 30.5
      25 April 2015 at 3:31 pm

      do you like people pulling your hair at work fisi?

  31. ianmac 31
    24 April 2015 at 6:30 pm

    fisi. Were you one of those who condemned Helen for signing a painting for charity? In this case there are numerous pictures of an adult male doing dodgy stuff. It does exist. It appears to be unique in the political world so would you be happy to have your daughter’s hair fondled by a powerful middle aged male?

  32. outofbed 32
    24 April 2015 at 7:15 pm

    Ok
    The way i look at is this
    Say…
    Andrew little goes into a cafe in Island bay and over a period of months touches a waitresses hair is told to stop but ignores it
    Media commentators find lots and lots of photos of Andrew little touching young girls hair
    The Woman affairs spokesperson for Labour sees nothing wrong with this behaviour
    As does Mike Hoskings
    The Herald Runs a hatchet job on the poor waitress
    And Andrew says his sorry he was just horsing around.

    I would still loudly condemn this behaviour by Andrew Little
    I would condemn The labour Woman affairs spokesperson
    And I would condemn Hoskings for supporting him
    And the National party supporters would be calling for him to resign and I would join them

    If I walked into a cafe and pulled John Keys hair I would be in a police cell in about 15 Mins

    PS And why does he only touch Women’s Hair ?

  33. Ian 33
    24 April 2015 at 7:30 pm

    Anzac day tomorrow guys. Time to move on maybe. On your pony now,we shall remember them.

    • rhinocrates 33.1
      24 April 2015 at 7:47 pm

      It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time you know.

    • ankerawshark 33.2
      24 April 2015 at 8:12 pm

      Why should we move on. For many of us Keys behaviour triggers off unpleasant memories of males in the work place touching us without our consent and continuing to do so. Bet it hasn’t happened to you Ian.

      • rhinocrates 33.2.1
        24 April 2015 at 10:21 pm

        If anything, we’re seeing the sort of thing that enables bullies and sexual harassment. It’s ugly, but its exposed to light and widely seem to be as despicable and disingenuous as it is.

        It will be worth asking Keys sycophants who enable sexual harassment with their excuses how they feel about sexual harassment, a woman’s right to dignity and why they feel that they have the right to define what harassment is and not a woman subjected to it.

        I’d like to see Hosking’s answer.

    • Colonial Rawshark 33.3
      24 April 2015 at 8:15 pm

      Anzac day tomorrow guys. Time to move on maybe. On your pony now,we shall remember them.

      So much for that much vaunted personal accountability eh? Just like the political elite of the day who wasted so many ANZAC lives.

  34. Tigger 34
    24 April 2015 at 8:43 pm

    Upon reflection I’ve reacted the wrong way to this. Clearly yanking hair is fun and games to Key. Next time I meet him I will make sure to pull his hair. Of course, his toupee will slide off his scalp but hey, just horsing around!

  35. emergency mike 35
    24 April 2015 at 9:58 pm

    I just want to say that for all the faux outrage from the righties on this thread that some here are implying that Key is a pedo, and all the genuine concern from some lefties that that is not a good way to go, I can’t find a single instance on this thread where anybody actually implies it.

    Creep, sicko, perv, sure. But pedo no. Please correct me if I’m wrong, I only had a quick scan through it.

    • rawshark-yeshe 35.1
      25 April 2015 at 3:42 pm

      well mike, I am still wanting to find the correct word for someone inflicting their hair fetish on a child — because then it maybe ceases to be a fetish and becomes something else in the eyes of our laws.

      I used an example earlier on this thread. If any of us saw a not-known 51 year old man serially fondllng and caressing girls’ pigtails and ponytails in a public place, we would call the police .. well, I would. And I believe the man would be charged with something rather more than having a euphemistically described hair fetish — wouldn’t he ?

  36. RedBaronCV 36
    24 April 2015 at 10:02 pm

    I wouldn’t mind betting that there is a strong correlation between the waitress hair pulling episodes and the times when JK has been under heavy pressure and feeling like a loser. Election going badly? pull someone’s hair to make himself feel more powerful?

  37. Reddelusion 37
    24 April 2015 at 10:05 pm

    Classic Nietzsch you lot born of envy you just invert traditional virtues,the good are moaning miserable, whining failures ( champaign socialist) the bad are successful, outgoing, positive friendly ,Hence in your world jk is the devil incarnated so glad I don’t live in the socialist headspace, a life wasted

  38. gnomic 38
    24 April 2015 at 11:30 pm

    Once again class has not been paying attention. I told you years ago that in my opinion John Key is a smirking weasel with a juvenile sense of humour. No doubt you were busy on Facebook. Or twittering, hahaha. I feel sure I must have intimated he had no new ideas and was a willing servile tool and pawn of multinational capitalism.

    There is no good in this man. Certainly not for the future of Aotearoa.

  39. idlegus 39
    25 April 2015 at 7:01 am

    “I’ve learned so much from this instructive episode.

    For example, if you are a victim of sexual or pseudosexual harassment in NZ:

    *don’t complain about it to your boss, the perp, or any media; just suck it up as a woman’s lot.
    *if you do decide to complain, make sure it is not about an older man in a position of power.
    *find a safe house and don’t answer the door or phone, especially to lying journalists claiming they are just there to help. They won’t.
    *don’t expect any assistance or support from the Minister of Women’s Affairs: she’s afraid for her job too. These powerful men, their tentacles reach everywhere!
    *don’t seek legal redress, especially on a waitress’s wage. Lawyers will see you as a money-making opportunity all right, but it’s you who will mostly be providing the money.
    *if you possess obvious sexual come-ons like hair, breasts or reproductive parts, leave them at home when you go out. Otherwise it’s all your fault for tempting the weak.

    As Benny Hill used to say: learning, learning all the time.” daleaway (british blog comment)

  40. linda 40
    25 April 2015 at 10:24 am

    the leader creepykey is a follicle pervert

  41. pohutukawakid 41
    25 April 2015 at 2:53 pm

    Watch “The Wolf of Wall Street”

  42. ourcreepynzpm 42
    30 April 2015 at 4:22 pm

    too right he is like Savile!
    http://picosong.com/XLSu/

    [r0b: releasing this comment, but really think it is incorrect and unhelpful to make this comparison.]

    • Clemgeopin 42.1
      30 April 2015 at 6:39 pm

      Oh, no, I am surprised you released it. The last 10 words (if I heard correctly) are shocking. Please listen again and please consider deleting the comment.

Links to post

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.