TITVS ADVXAS - THE CENTVRION OF TRVTH On February 1st 2010, TITVS ADVXAS was reopened but will now be more light-hearted, being run by a third party. Titvs Advxas has agreed to this on the understanding that it continues with its Nationalist theme... Disclaimer: Please note that these posts are entirely the opinion of the authors not the British National Party nor anyone else. ,

Friday, 31 July 2009

Gay police officers who had baby are both still ‘married’ to other men

The two gay police officers who became the first British same sex couple to have a baby through a relative are both still “married” to other men, it was disclosed today.

Stephen Ponder, 28, a special constable, and his partner Ivan Sigston, 43, a Hampshire police dog handler, began an affair after they met when still with their previous partners.

Now Mr Ponder is seeking a divorce from cleaner Ian Briggs, 49, while Mr Sigston is also divorcing former partner Steve Aylett, 38, a banker.

Earlier this week it was revealed that Mr Ponder's sister, Lorna Bradley, had given birth last month to a baby, named William, who was conceived using Mr Sigston's sperm. The two men are now bringing up William at their Southampton home and plan to legally adopt him.

The two gay couples are reported to have met several years ago through a gay networking site and their shared interest in dogs.

After becoming close friends, both couples were witnesses to each other's civil partnership ceremonies in 2007. But neither partnersip lasted more than a few months and Mr Ponder and Mr Sigston began a relationship. However it was disclosed today that Mr Briggs is resisting Mr Ponder's divorce application.

He was quoted as saying: "It is clear they were having an affair behind our backs. The four of us became close, but I had not idea they would end up running off. The weddings must have been a sham as they became a couple within months."

He claims to have been left in debt by Mr Ponder, but added: "I still love him and want him back." Mr Aylett has agreed to a speedy divorce from Mr Sigston.

He was quoted as saying: “I've put it behind me and want to look ahead.''

Mrs Bradley, 31, who is married with three children, is said to have volunteered to have the baby for her brother and his partner out of “sisterly love” and no fee was paid. Because Mr Sigston was not registered as the father on the birth certificate, he and Mr Ponder have to adopt the baby, who is now around three weeks old.


Anonymous said...

Sorry, but I think this stuff is sick. If you are gay, fine get on with it in private.
I don't see why these folks need everyone to know they are gay and what they get up to. Have a sense of privacy like the rest of us.
I also think involving children in their relationship is utterly wrong. God knows what phycological damage they are doing to these kids, especially with the growing muslim dominence it this country. These children can expect to be bullied or worse in the coming dacades.


I agree Anonymous. The article is reposted from a Daily tabloid website. I highlighted it because of the sordid nature of their infidelity from their own 'partners'. The child will become a target for many reasons, one being the unnatural relationship of the parents.Another being their occupation.
I cannot see why they have gone public. Like you say, there are some things best left behind closed doors

CorshamCrusader said...

I agree,what goes on behind closed doors is their business, but the rest of us don't need or want to know about it. The fact they are bringing a child up together is disgusting, the frankfurt school have a lot to answer for.

Anonymous said...

What we have here is everyone falling over backwards to say that they agree that homosexual (I do not use the word 'Gay' as it is meaningless and sidesteps exactly what they are and practice) men can a) 'marry' and b) have a 'family'. Very noble of these two sodomites, however has anyone put their political correctness on hold for long enough to ask themselves if a child would really relish growing up in this environment? If two adults wish to conduct a perverted lifestyle in private, that is their business - but to bring a child into it to justify that belief to the world is just wrong. What happened to the child's rights?

Freddy said...

Wow, what a brave act posting against the gay people's life with an ANONYMOUS name and no web site...

With you people the world will never grow up ;D

Mark said...

You appear to have become confused amidst the fury you've whipped yourself up into over this issue.
I can only imagine you condemn infidelity. Condemning fidelity contradicts every other point you are making.
I should like you to consider the wider implications of bringing children into the world and offering them a stable, nurturing environment. Why does your opinion focus solely on concerns relating to homosexuality? The welfare of a child depends on the intrinsic qualities and attributes of individual parents. While the nuclear family model that is so often quoted as the ideal becomes rarer, it is not infallible. Tortured, damaged, abused children have been raised in many different home environments. Your argument somehow implies that the nuclear family which is based on a standard heterosexual model is one you not only favour, but clumsily fail to connect with many failings. Is the case of Baby P, to name just one of many, not an example of this? Homosexual parenting does not correlate with bad parenting. Heterosexual parenting does not correlate with good parenting. Each family construct should be assessed on its own individual merits. Returning to your point on fidelity, I agree that there are some issues regarding this particular case which are concerning. However, would you even bat an eyelid in the instance where the two parents and ex-partners were all heterosexual? I certainly believe any media interest in such a case would be conspicuously absent, as would yours!


To Freddy ~Who?~,
Firstly by your own standards, being called Freddy ..... is also anonymous.
Secondly my middle name IS Titus, something that has caused amusement for others for my entire life. So 'Freddy ?' (if your name really is Frederick) I truly am 'Titus ?'
Thirdly, if you bothered to read the article, it is not about condemning homosexuality, but about condemning infidelity.
Fourthly, whilst I do not approve of homosexuality and the blatant way it is reported as a 'good and natural' alternative to a heterosexual relationship, I appreciate that it is now legalised and homosexuals now have certain rights that heterosexuals do not have, in this topsy turvy world of ours.
Finally, I hope you appreciate that this is my blog, and I am allowing your comments to be seen. If I were a true homophobe, they would not

Post a Comment


...like the one below to your blog:


email TITVS with your specification (width/height etc)