Inspecting lice in a prison setting (with German prostitutes no less) is strictly Nazi concentration camp. The hitch is buying women commercially for the purposes of beating & humiliating them in sex orgies is NOT fantasy. That's real life. If it were ANY other profession Mosley would have been indicted. Millions of children & young women are trafficked--sold, kidnapped or coerced--worldwide for the purposes of $$ sex. Most prostitutes are victims of abuse, poverty, drugs & pimps. Barnes laments sports cheats as "immoral" who "prey on the vulnerable" robbing them of $$--while he dismisses as negligible (merely "disgusting") husbands who cheat on wives exposing them to health risks while exploiting other men's daughter's as throwaway garbage. (Even when Johns use condoms that won't eliminate the risk of HIV & won't prevent all SDTs. Example: cervical cancer/herpies).

"Immoral" ISN'T confined to robbing people of $$.
If preying on the vulnerable is immoral--than Mosely IS immoral

cathy hansen, ruckersville, virginia, USA

I wonder whether this author will be equally magnamous about such an insidious act if one of the five females in this act happened to be one of his immediate family members, his wife perhaps.

Raj, Coimbatore, India

As a Christian I find what Max has done Disgusting and I deplore it.
However it appears In Law that he may not have committed a crime.
I therefore, disgusted as I am have no right to force my views on him or others..
IMHO far to many Christian folk to-day do their cause more harm by forcing their views on Non Christians. So if Max wants do be disgusting thats his choice He will have to face up to the consequences it's not our responsibility to judge him.

Johnty Lyons, Newtownards, Co Down N.Ireland

For any senior figure figure, personal behaviour of this nature, once made public is an embarrassment to the organisation and therefore inappropriate. There exist a responsibility to present the sport and its supporters in the best possible light at all times. The issue of morality is irrelevant. The only honorable course for Max is to step down and hope he is not marked out for rediculous immortality----see Kundera.

Knight, Tokyo, Japan

Measured and insightful as ever.
Merci

jody McStravick, Viroflay, France

Simon,
Max Mosley is President of a international organisation, as has been pointed out, a position of trust, he has to lead by example in public and private life. it cannot be compromised.

If he cannot, lead by example, he should not be in that position, he is compromised and has to resign, impaired judgement.
I believe it is immoral, he should not have stood for President if he could not maintain a high standard of integrity. He has been found out, fall on your sword Max.

A E Willis, London, UK

Do you really believe that car sales could be affected and that is the basis of the car manufacturers assault on Mosley - of course not.

No one going into a Merc or BMW showroom today would think twice about Mosley's bizzare sexual behaviour as part of their decision making process.

Joe, Reading,

He is MARRIED! Is that part not IMMORAL!

stuart blemcn, los angeles, ca

I think you presume too much in your estimation of 'our' attitude to Hoddle's beliefs. As an atheist I don't find his views particularly repugnant, but merely as barmy as the views of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Chief Rabbi and so on. What was repugnant was the sanctimonious self-righteousness of those who criticised him coupled with the implicit racism that such criticism involved. As you pointed out, had he not been white his bonkers views would not have mattered a jot. The self-righteous were too busy fighting over the 'moral' high ground to even begin to see the hypocrisy of their own words.

P A K, Cambridge,

Me thinks the man doth protest too much.

What goes on behind closed doors and in mutual consent, whilst not to everyones liking, is a private matter. I think Mr Barnes should drop the use of "we" and change it to "I" - you, sir, cannot speak on my behalf on this or any other matter.

Will, Vienna, Austria

The issue here surely is not so much how we view Mosley's antics but how we view teh proposition on whether he should be dropped by F1. Are they "right" to do so?
My line on this is that they are at liberytto take a firm view on this. They are the custodians (certainly the financial custodians; less certainly the moral ones) of F1 and if they feel that Mosley's actions have, and will contiune to, damage the sport - and in effect the incomes and livelihood of their stakeholders -then they are perfectly entitled to proceed on the grounds of the "greatest happiness of the greatest number".
Indeed it is their moral obligation to do so.

John Bateman, London,

The issue here, with Max Mosley, is that he sits in a position of trust - where he is continually expected to exercise good judgement, demonstrate impeccable fairness, practise good management, show strong leadership and act as a worldwde ambassador.

He has not denied that he was the person in the video and the subject of the newspaper article (however it came to be "exposing" him!). I would suggest that he has clearly demonstrated a failure to act in a manner appropriate to his position. I question whether anyone in a similar position would be allowed by his organisation to remain in that capacity. It seems inevitable that he can no longer continue to perform his duties satisfactorily, as nobody will have confidence in his ability to fairly and impartially exercise sound judgement.

The time has surely come for him to resign as a matter of urgency - before he inflicts any more damage on the sport and industry he represents.

Paul, Birmingham, UK

It`s none of our dammed business what he gets up to behind closed doors. Quid pro quo, can we expect this newspaper to grant Mr Mosley an opertunity to reveal the sexual habits of Simon Barnes ? ..surely not..

Stuart Andrews, Auckland, New Zealand

Mosley, as any of us, should have his private life respected. That's a fact.
Whatever his fantasies are, we should not comment on them.

But what is shocking here is that they were prostitutes. Had they been consenting adults, then it would have been a completely different story.
Unfortunately, anyone who understands how painful it is to sell your body, how low you have to be to come to such denial of your own honour/self-esteem, will understand that Mr Mosley's behaviour is simply unacceptable.
I'm not saying that all prostitutes are unhappy. Some of them are probably enjoying it. But being a client, hence encouraging this, is just unacceptable.

Nicolas, London,

Anti-Semitism does not have to be public to be anti-Semitism, just as racist behaviour doesn't have to be public to be racist. IF the Camp inmate angle is a correct (or at least valid) interpretation, then the conclusion as to the at least part of the essential nature of the person follows on from that. this isn't about hookers and dressing up and whatnot. It's about the apparent display of an inherent quality intrinsic to the person. the fact that he apparently likes S&M with Hookers isn't why he should resign. It's the fact that it appears to have exposed his opinions about a particular group of people. that's a viewpoint not compatible with the office he holds.

David, Oxford,

I was looking forward to your views on this issue Simon, and as usual you have written with humanity and perception. I would take issue with one thing though - Glenn Hoddle would probably have survived the disability comments if it weren't for the fact that his team were falling apart and he had already blotted his copybook with his dubious man-management, the faith-healer stuff and so on.

But you are absolutely right that if Mosley goes, it will be a commercial decision dressed up with the hypocrasy of a 'moral stance' - now that really is disgusting.

Chris, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

There exists a public behaviour and a personal one everybody accepts, and something like a moral above them. The public behaviour requires certain skills and exploits, the per-sonal behaviour requires and involves, sometimes, completely different skills and attitudes. The public behaviour involves a form of relationship in which the fantasy is, or ought be, left out. The personal behaviour is the one in which fantasy expresses itself more, particu-larly, of course, in the sexual sphere. This means we are split people, always. Thinking that rich people, or famous people, or people who have important social engagements, will be-have in a totally different way, is naïve. Why should they do it? But we feel the need they behave in a different way. We. To me, it is not a matter of immoral or disgusting, not only at least: it is a matter of what we want to believe in. And we want to believe in something we know to be, inside us, quite impossible: being not split.

Renato Riccardi, Palermo, Iyaly

Sorry Simon its unacceptable. The camp inmate angle and the undoubted views of the father are a factor. His politics are clearly his own as is his view on his fathers politics but facism and race related views cast a long shadow . However when we see the FIA's lukewarm reaction to what we saw in Spain recently you have got to wonder if his carefully hidden private views do impact on the FIA and its decisions. Can he be an objective, dispassionate President not influenced by unsavoury views and politics?
The fact he offers an excuse that he spoke in German 'because a couple of the ladies were German' (despite their complaints that they couldn't understand him) is as cowardly and pathetic as the man himself, as is the lawsuit that he can afford to try as a publicity stunt.
Bye bye Max, F1 will be a better run organisation without you. I only hope Bernie will soon follow as F1 recently has appeared to be an organisation that is run like a petty fiefdom to swell the ego of its leaders.

Christian, Blackpool,