Who is Demetri Marchessini The Daily Telegraph’s Trouser-Wearing UKIP Columnist
WHO is Demetri Marchessini? Today the Daily Telegraph features this open letter criticising The Times columnist Libby Purves. The long note is signed by Demetri Marchessini, billed as a Greek-born businessman and author.
We know that last year Demetri Marchessini donated £10,000 to Ukip. They accepted.
Earlier this month he was part of an open debate:
A lively panel debate on the equality of men and women, with Vanessa Feltz, Cristina Odone, Sarah Rainey, Catherine Marcus and Demetri Marchessini, in front of a live audience. All the members of the panel have firmly held views, and the debate promises to be stimulating and controversial.
He has in the past told us his views on sex:
No girl is forced to dress in a tarty way, or to look vulgar, or to encourage men. Those that choose to do so must take the consequences. Suppose three women walked into a pub — one is dressed in a normal way, the second is wearing a skirt up to her crotch, and has her boobs hanging out, and the third is completely nude. Does anyone believe that the men in the pub would have the same reaction to all three women?
And trousers. He is an authority on women in trousers:
You bring up the fact that I do not approve of women wearing trousers. But what you do not say (although I explained it to your reporter) is that the Bible says (in the very beginning) that anyone who wears the clothes of the opposite sex is “an abomination”. Is it controversial to accept the Bible? Indeed, for thousands of years, wearing the clothes of the opposite sex was considered a crime throughout the civilised world, with severe penalties. Several years ago, the Pope said in a speech, “The blurring of the genders is more dangerous to the world than the destruction of the all rain forests.” In short nothing has changed. Is it controversial to agree with the Pope?
Demetri Marchessini is the author of Women in Trousers:
“Walk along any street and you see women using trousers like a uniform every single day. This is hostile behaviour. They are deliberately dressing in a way that is opposite to what men would like.”
He says women in trousers are unattractive from the rear, an opinion he illustrates with photos of women in trousers.
You can read more like that on his website, and hang out with readers whose views Mr Marchessini highlights:
This is a great blog, I find myself agreeing with nearly all your views and I have a completely different religious and ethnic background. - Bojangles
Thanks a great deal for your exposition on the topic of rape. Frame-ups have been very common. The men folks are the vulnerable ones here. - David
Please keep speaking your mind, this country needs people like you with the courage to say what the majority are thinking, now more than ever. - Steven – May 23, 2013 at 00:30
Thank you Mr. Marchessini for giving a voice to the people. We need your erudite voice to wake up the sleeping PC clones. - Old Sarge
Pryn Valletort reviews:
A true tour-de-force. Not a crease is left un-pressed or a seam left unstitched in this wonderful appraisal of all things trouserly in the context of the feminine form. The sheer audaciousness of the writing defies description. This is cutting edge contemporary writing at its very best. Quite why this book is not up there with the likes of “Three Collars Blue – an appraisal of the shirt in contemporary Poland ” and “Hose life is it anyway? – a critique in praise of Nylon Stockings” is beyond me. Indeed I might go so far as to suggest that this work may supplant the great magnum opus “Gussets – an inside story”. Full of rich insights into the perception of the female form as viewed from behind clearly written by someone with a clear appreciation and understanding of the feminine form. Anecdotes and quips a-plenty. I laughed until I stopped. I await the second volume with eager anticipation. I am in fact, panting at the prospect of what delights this author will turn-up with next!
He looks not a lot unlike a Daily Mail columnist, trolling for views. His book on trousers was picked up in many newspapers:
* Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, Mr Marchessini acknowledged some of his views might be seen as “controversial” and confirmed he thinks women in trousers is an “abomination”.
The Guardian’s Liz Hoggard called him a “Greek playboy”.
Women in Trousers is offensive, outdated, misogynistic claptrap. And yet it rings a bell. The trouser is a truly treacherous garment. Maybe it’s time to call for a return to the skirt, to the kinder, gentler days when no one would every dream of mentioning a woman’s booty.
* Asked on Channel 4 News if he agreed with Mr Marchessini’s views on trousers, Ukip MEP Roger Helmer said: ‘Not at all, no and I don’t think many people in Ukip would agree with that.
He sets the news agenda does this skirt-admirer.
Mr Marchessini likes communicating by adverts. Why rely on nepotism to get a job as a national newspaper columnist when you can just pay? Last May, he placed an ad in The Times critical of the paper’s political columnist, Rachel Sylvester.
His latest column complains about Purves’ description of Russian president Vladimir Putin’s policies on homosexuality as bigoted. He begins:
“One of the fascinating questions about journalistic life in London is why the well-known columnist Libby Purves, who has clearly stated that she does not believe in religion, repeatedly tells those who do believe in religion, what they should think.”
He goes on:
“There are at least 12 places in the bible that describe homosexuality as an ‘abomination’.”
“What Miss Purves and many others cannot grasp is the fact that when our government made homosexuality legal, it did not make it moral.
“Governments can decide on laws, but only God decides on morality. How can anybody, let alone Miss Purvis (sic), tell people what they should think about homosexuality?”
He says Purves has downplayed “the connection of homosexuality to religion” . He says homosexuality has been “a major sin in the Christian religion for 2,000 years”:
“What Miss Purves and many others cannot grasp is the fact that when our government made homosexuality legal, it did not make it moral. Governments can decide on laws, but only God decides on morality. How can anybody, let alone Miss Purvis (sic), tell people what they should think about homosexuality?”
Marchessini says ‘homophobic’ is not a word: “It cannot be found in any dictionary, nor does it have any meaning.”
He’s wrong about that. Both ‘homo’ and ‘phobia’ have Greek roots – like Mr Marchessini.
He also misquotes Purves. He says she said: ”…the deep and obvious root of homophobia is religion”. But she wrote: “…one deep and obvious root of homophobia is religion.”
One way to bypass the subs and fact checkers is to just pay for an advert. You can get anything into the papers that way.
Update: Says Purves: He is free to approve of the beatings and hangings of young men across the world in the name of what he considers religion. In the same spirit, I am free to say he is a loony.”