Parkinson’s Law is a brilliant observation about how work expands in time to complete it. 

We’re familiar, too, with Murphy’s Law — more vulgarly known as Sod’s Law — which states that if anything can go wrong, it surely will.

A slice of buttered toast will fall on the floor accidentally, as the example most often cited.

There are enough laws written by others. This week, I will be forming my own law. It should contain as much truth to me as the laws of others.

It is clear that you don’t have to pay attention to actresses and actors political opinions. This is because they all seem to think exactly alike — and once you’ve heard one of them, you’ve heard them all.

They share the same Left-ofcenter, woke views on all subjects.

My law states that no matter who the star on stage or screen is invited to speak out about politics, such as Question Time and Have I Got News For You. 

Actors have identical political opinions. Benedict Cumberbatch, pictured in 2015, was the latest actor to make a contribution to wakery when he decried ‘toxic masculinity.

The gospel according to Hollywood groupthink will have you expecting a predictable recital before the speaker has spoken one word. 

Donald Trump Trump is the devil in person. Boris Johnson? Not much better. Brexit? Only backed by thick racists, xenophobes. How much public spending is it? It is not enough.

Is mass immigration possible? The more, the better. How much is the BBC licence fee? This sacred institution is opposed by only Right-wing thugs. Transgender rights? It’s amazing in all ways.

Man-made global warming? It is an apocalypse that governments have not done enough to avoid (and forget that performers who hold this view are just returning from LA for a global tour to promote the latest movie).

Benedict Cumberbatch was the latest person to contribute to luvviedom’s warm stew. This week, he called out ‘toxic masculinity’, ‘patriarchy, and demanded equality between men and woman.

Sky News spoke to him about his new movie, The Power Of The Dog. He stated that it was an ‘insecure defensive position’ that protested that “not all men were bad”. Each male must’shut down and listen’ because we have to ‘fix them’.

Since I don’t really understand what he was saying, it is not fair to say that I fully comprehend his gibberish.). 

It is clear, however that he conformed to the accepted opinion of the vast majority of his colleagues by painting female victims of male oppression.

Okay, there may be a few exceptions to this law. But it is also possible that toast ends up buttered.

Sometimes, I will openly admit that there is a rare rogue actor who says something unwise or mildly Right-wing. 

Once in a blue moon, a rogue actor pops up to say something mildly Right-wing. I'm thinking of Laurence Fox (pictured in 2019) who made one or two controversial remarks about race

Every once in a while, an actor will appear and say something slightly Right-wing. Laurence Fox (pictured 2019), who made some controversial remarks regarding race

Laurence Fox was a controversial commentator about race last year.

As I can recall, he claimed that the Duchess Of Sussex wasn’t a victim to racism while simultaneously telling an audience member who dismissed him for being a “white privileged man” that this was indeed racist.

Then, look at the consequences of his actions when he got out of line. The great majority of his actors immediately disowned him, much like J. K. Rowling who was ‘cancelled by her stars’. Did she offend? 

She dared to utter the obvious truth — obvious to most of us, at any rate — that people who menstruate are traditionally known as women. 

However, for every Laurence Fox that you can name from actors’ list, I could name at least one dozen Emma Thompsons or Brian Coxes as well as Ricky Tomlinsons and Ricky Tomlinsons. 

They won’t be seen straying too far from The Guardian’s off-the-shelf opinions.

It’s not my intention to discuss the right and wrongs on the topics that actors and actresses like ranting about. They will be the subject of another post.

I do not challenge the right of actors to make public statements on any subject that interests them. Journalists and actors should have the same rights as journalists, to express their opinions on any topic they choose.

The great difference is that for every Tom Utley or Richard Littlejohn who backed Brexit, you will have no trouble naming other columnists — Matthew Parris, say, or Polly Toynbee — who think it was a terrible idea.

There are many different ways journalists can think. The amazing thing about actors and actresses is their ability to think like journalists. 

Why is the majority of these people choosing EU membership instead of Brexit? Blair to Thatcher, Trump to Trump; high-spending to low-spending and liberalism over social conservatism?

This could be due to self-interest. It is possible that they are attracted to large government spending because of the possibility of receiving lucrative state subsidies for arts. 

A strong motivator could be the fear that they will suffer the fate of Laurence Fox’s film, which was destroyed when Fox spoke Right-of Centre views.

I sometimes suspect that one or two veteran theatrical dames — no names, no pack-drill — may secretly harbour opinions closer to my own than those they express in public. If they do, I suspect that they are very silent about it, possibly wisely.

But, I have to give credit to the vast majority of actors/actresses and say they appear more motivated by conviction than their self-interests or fears.

When Fox stepped out of line he was disowned by his fellow actors, suffering the same fate as J. K. Rowling (pictured in 2018), who has been 'cancelled' by the stars she made rich

Fox was disowned for his actions and was reprimanded by his fellow actors. J. K. Rowling (pictured 2018) has also been ‘cancelled’ by her stars.

One example: Do you remember Michelle Williams’ speech just before lockdown? She accepted the Golden Globe as best actress in a mini-series on TV. It was for her role in Fosse/Verdon. 

She stated in it that she wouldn’t have been awarded the prize if she had not exercised her right to choice, which is the familiar euphemism used for aborting a child.

Although I’m sure many of my readers disagree with me, I find this quite shocking. Because I strongly believe that abortion is illegal on demand.

She seemed to think that the Golden Globe award for best actress in mini-series is more important than her unborn child. This was my opinion, as well as many others who agree with it.

What struck me most was the loud, aural cheer from famous actors. 

All of them were standing up, flapping their hands as the camera moved around the room. Some actresses shed tears of joy.

I was surrounded by Hollywood’s royalty and saw no actor not cheer Williams’ endorsement of abortion-on-demand. No matter what your opinion on this controversial issue may be, I find it incredibly odd.

The debate about abortion is divided regardless of political opinions, trades, or professions. 

You’ll find Socialists, Conservatives, businessmen, scientists and lawyers who oppose it, and others of the same political persuasion — and in the same line of work — who support it.

Is it possible that actors, and only acting professionals, are so united in supporting a woman’s right of choice over a unborn child’s right for life?

Why is it that they seem to be so similar in nearly every view they hold on topics as diverse as militant feminism and global warming?

Cumberbatch could say that men are the ones who have to be repaired. It’s actors who are in the grip of Hollywood groupthink that need it most. Until then, I urge you to obey Utley’s Law — and don’t bother to listen.