He also gives the name of the specific woman he paid for sex. He gets the name of the Cambridge college wrong Darwin not Downing. While it's deeply grim and grubby without naming the women involved, you could just about make an excuse for it if those involved were not identified, as a sort of 'diary of a dirty old perve' piece of confessional writing.
As it is, however, it's just sexual harassment. Serious journalism is dying because news is funded by how many clicks they get, so articles and editorials are written to appeal to the lowest of interests or to cause outrage and then get rage clicks. Not sure that's the case. The Spectator is paywalled, and they don't show so much as a line of this muck to try to get you to signup.
Log in to update your newsletter preferences. What a revolting man. Has to reduce her back to being an object that exists for his benefit. But she was way out of his league anyway so he had to pay someone else to service his pathetic cock. I hope he realises how fucking pathetic this story makes him look.
And while Lloyd may well be a slave to his sad libido, not all men are, thank goodness. If that's the case, why does our society allow men complete freedom? Shouldn't they have this lunatic curtailed somehow or at least be under chaperone or some kind of tagging system?
This man couldn't afford the lecturer, but could afford the prostituted woman. What if a man-chained-to-lunatic can't afford either? Is rape understandable then? God I'm sick of men - of whatever politics - who view women as objects for their gratification and validation. I recall that it was the Telegraph I think that floated the idea of journalists being paid per click for their stories. Hopefully shouted down. The direction of our porn salacious click bait saturated digital experiences is utterly depressing.
