Like it or not we prefer our politicians to be young-ish, dominant and virile. When push came to shove and a cross in the box was demanded, there was absolutely no chance Bernie Sanders was going to get the nod. It is a long-held belief that ex-Tory leader William Hague was destined never to hold the highest of UK offices, as he was as bald as a coot. Many consider it was Michael Foot’s ‘donkey jacket at the Cenotaph’ that did it for him whereas we all know it was that he was a hundred and four years of age. The same is going to be levelled at ol’ Jezza and the only position he’s in-waiting for is on the backbenches.

Whilst the days of the elder senior statesman holding power are long gone it is, however, extremely sensible that we try and understand why this is the case, exactly why we place so much trust in qualities that don’t necessarily go hand-in-hand with wisdom and how this misplaced faith can lead us down the wrong path.

At the risk of pressing the repeat button, again, we all know the story by now. In the early ‘naughties’, The Don was taped in full braggadocio flow explaining how his fame and fortune allowed him to sexually assault women at will. Fast forward eleven short years and, following further Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal flirtations, he is elected as Commander in Chief of the most powerful country and world economy. The result certainly handed him the keys to the locker room and it was as if the women’s stories had, at best never happened, or at worst, didn’t matter. But they should.

A recently published book, ‘All The President’s Women’ (it was surely only a matter of time) uncovers the depths of this president’s inappropriate sexual behaviour and the rationale behind it. During the course of its investigations the authors conducted over a hundred interviews which have led to a total of 67 accusations of sexual misconduct. They had no choice but to conclude his actions were intentional, repeated and systematic. The one that really gets me where it hurts, and it isn’t even one that’s lead to a formal accusation, is an anecdote from catwalk model, NaKina Carr, where Trump swanned into the models’ prohibited group dressing room threw, his arms akimbo and shouted “OK, ladies, drop ‘em”. Several did. Bad enough on its own until you realise he was accompanied, three steps behind, by his heavily pregnant wife, Ivana. WTF.

Much closer to home is our very own Mini Me, Boris Johnson. With accusations of thigh-grabbing at London mayoral lunches, lurid tales of pole-dancing afternoons dressed-up as IT lessons with Jennifer Arcuri and the (genuine) concerns for the safety of his current gf during a heated row, how different are our own PM’s actions? His shocking use of ‘humbug’ to fob-off Paula Sherriff’s heartfelt plea, together with his continued use of derogatory, inflammatory language, including calling the leader of the opposition ‘a big girl’s blouse’ on camera, are unprecedented. ‘How low can this man go?’ asked the belly-dancing actress to the bishop.

I for one do think we have a right to know how many children he has fathered but, with Jeremy Kyle no longer on our televisions, I guess we’ll never find out. Rest assured those attempting to sign-up for Universal Credit will be asked thus. I do believe we have a right to know if laws concerning the allocation of public cash have been side-stepped. Call me old fashioned but I believe in actions and words being consistent. I believe in an individual’s word being his bond. I believe in the truth counting above all else. All the baubles in the world are not worthy of a lie.

Whilst Trump and Johnson are the most visible and influential of men accused of such behaviours, they are far from the only ones, and here’s the key: they are of themselves not the core of the problem: the institutions they belong to and serve are of equal blame for they are the protectors. And we too are part of the problem.

The question has to be asked if these men actually see it as compromising or negatively impacting their progress to the top? Or, somewhat incredibly, do they see it as beneficial? Are these actions in some way intentional and now part of the political discourse? The cynic in me could well believe Trump, and perhaps Bumble, are happy to be associated with such claims as they are seen as being increasingly virile, sexually dominant and aggressive. Moreover, both appear happy to have relatively striking women on their arms for all this conveys, even though they are reputedly abhorred by them. Incorrectly viewed as determined, independent and strong these one-man populists are delighted to be cast in the Duerte/Erdogan/Orban light. I lead, you follow.

By keeping schtum or by ignoring this denigration of women, we legitimise it. As is often wrongly accredited, ironically to another serial philanderer, JFK, ‘the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing’ and if we leave these actions uncontested we allow them to proliferate. Bear this in mind the next time you enter the ballot box.