Melanie Phillips, the Gay Agenda and her penchant for Cahooning great Whoppers

50 sHaDeS oF iDiOcY: pArT 4

It may have come to your attention that I seem to be thwomping on endlessly about Daily Mail writers at the moment. You probably think they're an easy target for liberal lefties such as myself but you'd be wrong. 

They're even an easy target for barely sentient unicellular organisms such as the amoeba. It's just that these infinitesimal, shapeless protists have yet to muster their collective brains to create a subaquatic, microscopic Water Wide Web where they can vent their anger towards the likes of the Mail's Melanie Phillips and her attitude regarding sexuality. They've yet to achieve this because they don't actually have brains but I know that they're fed up with their binary fission (or cell division) reproduction methods, that don't adhere to heterosexual ideology, being demeaned by the likes of Ms Phillips. They informed me of this through the medium of dreams, the cheeky little tinkers.

Melanie Phillips recently penned an article entitled:

'Yes, gays have often been the victims of prejudice. But they now risk becoming the new McCarthyites.'

Now, if you're like me, you're probably enraged by this 'McCarthyites' reference and over-griddling with disbelief like a sizzling, smoking kielbasa:

Just what the fuck does McCarthyites mean?

It's really irritating to not be clever. It's even worse when the Daily Mail write a headline that you don't understand. I put it down to stupid state school education. Surely the unceasingly hubble-bubble of copious marijuana bongs at the time had nothing to do with my lack of attentiveness in lessons.

Anyway, apparently McCarthyites aren't hippies who regularly indulge in textured vegetable protein Cumberland bangers with sun-dried tomatoes, which, by the way are simply delightful. Especially if you're hungry enough to eat a scabby horse. I doubt Black Beauty would have been anywhere near as delectable.

Essentially McCarthyism is defined as the practice of publicising accusations of disloyalty or subversion with insufficient regard to evidence. It is a term derived from Joseph Raymond "Joe" McCarthy, an American politician who served as a U.S. Senator for the state of Wisconsin from 1947 until his death in 1957. His main drive was to state that there were innumerable dangerous Communists, Soviet spies and sympathisers inside the United States federal government that had managed to overcome the obvious cover-blown ruse of trilby-clad agents sitting on park benches with eye-holes bored through broadsheet newspapers as they tried to glean nuclear secrets from passing squirrels.

But still I'm confused. 

How does this equate with the 'Gay Agenda' that Phillips is rallying against? 

She begins:

"Here’s a question ­shortly coming to an examination ­paper near you. What have mathematics, geography or science to do with homosexuality? Nothing at all, you say? Zero marks for you, then. Schoolchildren are to be bombarded with homosexual references in maths, geography and ­science lessons as part of a Government-backed drive to promote the gay agenda."

I wasn't aware that examination papers were coming near me again, shortly. I thought I was done with all that malarkey when I left uni. I'm not sure which subject's exam paper this question will appear on because it covers Maths, Geography and Science - maybe all of them. I reckon it probably incorporates Humanities, Religious Education, History, Art and Country Dance too.

I'm a bit miffed that Melanie Phillips answers the question for us without at least giving anyone a chance to try and offer some kind of elucidation. So, after deciding that her lack of patience or Quizmastering adeptness should be discounted, I'm going to try and answer the questions, posed mainly by myself. Under exam conditions:

Shush, this is serious and there isn't even anyone sitting next to me that I can copy the answers from. Not like the old days - 

Simon, where are you now? Your muffled 'pssts' and passive, sleight of hand pencil throwing stunts are the only reason I achieved GCSE English grades at all, I'm certain! 

Okay, competition time:

Maths:

1) A gay man decided to purchase three bottles of Amyl Nitrate (or Poppers) on-line because he felt a particular website's offer would work out cheaper than a singular purchase. Plus his sphincter had been tighter than the grip of  a giant squid's tendrils of late. He elected for a 10ml bottle of TNT for $27.00, a 10ml phial of Buzz for $32.00 and a 15ml vial of Jungle Juice Gold LARGE for $42.00 and paid the jam price of $100.00. 

Did he get a bargain..?   

Geography:

2) In which of these destinations would you be most likely to stumble across the most flagrant of vagina-decliner or todger-dodger? 

a) Brighton 

b) Heaven 

c) Haringey

d) 'Bell End' street in Wellingborough

Science:

3) Alan Turing was a British mathematician, logician, cryptanalyst and computer scientist. He formalised the concepts of algorithms and computation with the Turing Machine which could be adapted to simulate the logic of any computer algorithm and explain the functions of a CPU inside a computer. He is widely considered to be the father of computer science and artificial intelligence. During World War II, Turing was head of the Government Code and Cypher School (GC&CS) at Bletchley Park, codebreaking the Nazi's cryptanalysis and mastering, before dismantling their settings for the Enigma machine like a simple and enjoyable bounce through Peggle Nights. Following his unparalleled contribution to defeating the Nazis, Turing was charged with gross indecency under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 because he acknowledged having a homosexual relationship with a man called Arnold Murray. On June 7 1954, Alan Turing committed suicide. The question is:

a) Was Turing an absolute bufty who probably stuck the gun up his own batty as he rolled himself a seven, just for that very last thrill?

b) Should Alan Turing be regarded as one of the most important and revered  figures of the 20th Century? 

c) Does the image on the shroud (Alan's duvet) kept in the Cathedral of St John the baptist in Italy really resemble him? The carbon-dating seems to go back way further that the 1950s?

Humanities:

4) Does Melanie Phillips display any of the traits usually attributed to reasonable human beings?

* All answers appear at the bottom of this article.

According to Melanie:

"In geography, for example, they will be told to consider why homosexuals move from the ­countryside to cities." 

It's a bamboozler for sure. I mean, I know why heterosexuals move from the countryside to cities - they're looking for jobs, a bit of life, a slice of action. Maybe even a partner? But as for homosexuals, what on earth could their motivations be? As we all know, the backwater village has always been a pillar of acceptance for the more diverse members of the human race. 

She goes on to state: "In science, they [children] will be directed to ­animal species such as emperor ­penguins and sea horses, where the male takes a lead role in raising its young." All mocking aside, she has a good point here. It's absolutely outrageous to look at nature and watch millions of years of evolution going about its own business with the father nurturing its offspring. I mean who in their right mind could find that acceptable, let alone beautiful?

But apparently, according to Phillips:  "It is an abuse of childhood. And it’s all part of the ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very ­concept of normal sexual behaviour."

It seems that the gay lobby are somehow communicating with penguins and sea horses. This wasn't something I was aware of but we should definitely be scared. They're obviously some kind of camp amphibious Dr Doolittles with a mysterious 'agenda'. They move into cities and the suchlike or something(?), apparently? Who knows what tactics are being amassed?

"This is but the latest attempt to brainwash children with propaganda under the ­camouflage of ­education. It is an abuse of childhood." It appears that nurturing children accurately as to how nature works is somehow an incongruously devious plot. She follows up with:

"It’s all part of the ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very ­concept of normal sexual behaviour." 

The sea horses and penguins she mentioned earlier are also apparently not manifesting 'normal sexual behaviour' according to Ms Phillips's ideals.

Are these animals forming lobbies? What could their agenda be? Where are they meeting and why aren't the intelligence services listening in?

Or is it Melanie Phillips's archaic views about certain behaviours that don't constitute 'normality' in her own antiquated, narrow-minded, 1970s Super 8 world in a 21st century digital realm that has clearly left her befuddled?

And she looks like the rustiest of bikes.

* Competition answers:

1) Melanie Phillips is a dipshit dipstick ditzy dingbat

2) Melanie Phillips is a slack-jawed spleenmeisting sausage slurper

3) Melanie Phillips is a nit-witted numb-nutted nicompoop

4) No

All entries to be sent enclosed in the spongy-tissued pouched wall of an impregnated male seahorse to the usual address - roughly about 1,755 feet beneath the Antarctic Ocean. If you've alreay read the answers given above then you will be disqualified from the competition.

If you correctly scored three or more then you're in line for a prize. Entries will be pulled out of a submerged leather policeman's helmet once we've let the penguins loose on him. [We are not responsible for the competition entries that are stolen by amoebas - they're thieving little blobby motherfuckers.]