My word, this is amazing!

Undercover and uniformed officers have been monitoring three lay-bys off the A165 after residents of Skirlaugh and Coniston, East Yorks, repeatedly complained about the misbehaviour, known as dogging.

Despite 18 people being stopped in less than a month, none were found to be committing an offence and were given a leaflet with guidance on public sex.

No one arrested because no laws being broken! This isn\’t good enough for one politician of course:

Matthew Grove, an East Riding councillor, said: “These public areas have been stolen from the community by individuals who are using them in a way they were never intended. These are not courting couples, these are large groups of people engaging in behaviour which is simply not acceptable.

Not acceptable to you perhaps but obviously acceptable to those engaging in the activity. Agreed that this all getting very close to breaching the not frightening the horses clause of liberalism but that\’s just the way freedom and liberty pan out. Some people will do things that other people think they shouldn\’t do.

To which the correct response is \”tough titty mate\”. Which at this time of year is probably what everyone is in fact getting.

17 comments on “My word, this is amazing!

  1. A local beauty spot car park, used by hillwalkers by day and doggers by night, got a police notice warning the public about “antisocial behaviour”. That was the first us innocent ramblers knew of such horrors. Surely they were not antisocial, but excessively sociable?
    The public use of the facility was then “stolen” by the council, who locked the gate!

  2. I hope Richie doesn’t read this he might think that dogging is a misspell of his least favourite activity.

    To Matthew Grove, don’t worry old chap, your wife was underwhelming and will not be invited again

  3. “Agreed that this all getting very close to breaching the not frightening the horses clause of liberalism but that’s just the way freedom and liberty pan out.”

    Given that dogging is mostly a night-time activity, and dog-walking/rambling/birdwatching isn’t, there should really be no need for them to ever meet, should there?

    Unless….they want to.

  4. Not the Matthew Grove who has it in for Sarah Beeny?

    Just checking……………

    Yep, the one and the same.

    Does anyone get the impression that Matthew Grove is very much like Paul Bartlett of Stony Stratford in Milton Keynes (he attempted to ban open air smoking). In other words, a petty minded official who brain has been affected by power and can’t think straight when something doesn’t go the way they want it to go. In their little brains the whole world should kowtow to their views.

  5. I’m not entirely convinced that there is a “don’t frighten the horses” clause in Liberalism. I’m even less convinced that, if there is one, that there ought to be one. It seems to just be an excuse for a mutaween. You know, “if we let women show their faces in public, something not clearly defined but definitely catastrophic will happen, which is why we beat face-exhibitionists with sticks” kind of thing.

  6. JuliaM (#5), I walk the dog at night; he likes to go out for a beer in the evening. Haven’t noticed any of this other sort of dog activity though.

  7. “Matthew Grove, an East Riding councillor, said: “These public areas have been stolen from the community by individuals who are using them in a way they were never intended. These are not courting couples, these are large groups of people engaging in behaviour which is simply not acceptable.”

    Oh well, if he’s successful in his endeavours, maybe he could bring his expertise down to London & cast his attention in the direction of the top end of Hampstead Heath. (the bit the horses are terrified of).
    Should be fascinating…..

  8. Ian B,

    I’m not entirely convinced that there is a “don’t frighten the horses” clause in Liberalism. I’m even less convinced that, if there is one, that there ought to be one. It seems to just be an excuse for a mutaween.

    Maybe, but right now we’re still fighting people who get worked up about stuff that’s really none of their business, without having to fight about the stuff that just might be (like blokes that want to walk naked from Lands End to John O’Groats).

    I suspect the dogging thing is all about house prices. The faux bucolic rural idyll doesn’t include people in the country doing such grubby things.

  9. I know proverbial shorthand expressions don’t have to make sense, but… does anyone know just *why* horses are universally assumed to find human sexual behaviour frightening?

  10. I wonder how the human race survived before they had houses to reproduce in.

    If the outdoors are not the natural place for this kind of activity then I don’t know where is.

    I am sure that your house is somewhere that was not intended for a house.

    It ‘s in fact the indoor world that is not intended or natural for any kind of activity.

    Re-labelling the world to suit the narrow views of a few people’s modern view is just insane.

  11. Tim, I’m of the opposite view. It’s the stuff that people declare is their business because it upsets them in some way that is at the cutting edge, or to put it another way, the “mutaween” are the vanguard party of the total State, in western polities. Once as a citizenry you’ve accepted that the State can interfere in trivia like what sort of sex people have, or what recreational drugs they take, the field is wide open for everything else.

  12. IanB— ‘or what recreational drugs they take’

    That was my first introduction to libertarianism. While I’m not that partial anymore (Like most people I grew out of it in my 30’s) it still bugs me when I think back on it. My attitude was always, ‘ I’m not harming anyone else, so why the f*** do I have to skulk around like a criminal when I am just having fun.’

    The kids want to get high, it’s part of growing up. Let them be.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.