Cruella-blog

Woman's Hour and Joan Baez!

2012-02-21T13:04:00.004Z

So I was on BBC Radio 4 Woman's Hour today talking about the Unilad scandal. Plus in the green room I met Joan Baez - another guest on the show. You can listen to it all again here for the next seven days I think.

I'm also quoted (rather fittingly) in another article today about sexism in comedy on John Fleming's blog.

Back on banter and the BBC

2012-02-20T17:49:00.002Z

I'll be on BBC Radio Four Woman's Hour tomorrow (10am onwards) discussing the Unilad scandal and whether we can just dismiss overt sexism as "hilarious" comedy banter. Do tune in if you're about - it's available on the internet too. Not sure about overseas but you can try...!

Vajazzling WOW

2012-02-20T15:58:00.001Z

If you'd like to see me arguing with Dawn Porter about vajazzling at the WOW festival on the South Bank, you'd better get a ticket here.

My Dawkins encounter in full!

2012-02-17T14:12:00.004Z

So finally time for me to give the full account of the Rally for Free Expression at which Richard Dawkins spoke and then directly afterwards I spoke (eek!) and then I spoke to him and all that stuff. So firstly here's my speech. It's cut off a little at the beginning. What you miss is "Hello, great to be here. Those few of you who already know me probably know me from a viral internet video called Atheist Bitchslap. After that video went round I received hundreds of threats of violence, mostly rape, which goes to show that..."

And if you want to see what Dawkins himself said then that's here:

There were tons of other great speakers - you'll see the links to them at the end of either of those clips.

Afterwards I spoke briefly to Professor Dawkins. Proof! Proof!

To be honest I was just hoping to get a photo with him but he asked me about the story I told at the end of my speech and asked if he could quote it on his website. Of course I said yes. You'll see it here. Interestingly (but not surprisingly, Chinese whispers effect) as the story has been retold the woman in question has gotten younger and younger and both Dawkins and other commenters refer to her as a "girl". In fact she is considerably older than that and though she talked about my parents being angry if I didn't go to church I imagine that what keeps her trapped in the strictures of religious practice is a wider pressure from her whole family, her community, even her own children.

Several people have commented to the effect "no, free expression must apply in ALL cases, including for pornography". That's a rather silly point of view. No-one is shouting "what about free expression for child pornographers?". The thing is YES I fully support your right to engage in whatever weird and wonderful fully consensual sexual practices you and your adult friends so desire. And if you want to invite the neighbours round to watch too - fine by me. HOWEVER free expression does not include the freedom to make a profit from whatever activity you choose. As soon as you start making money from this - whether through direct subscription or ticket sales or through internet advertising and data collection - I think it starts to cloud the consent issue. Where big bucks are concerned it's also clear that it creates a need for manufacturers of pornography to seek out more extreme, more addictive images all the time. The impact on the consumers is nothing to do with freedom to hear a range of human views and opinions - it's all about manipulating a younger and younger consumer into parting with more and more money. This is not freedom of anything! These people are not talking about free expression but about free markets and unbridled capitalism. And there I take the view that we should regulate, that we need full and effective checks in place to ensure exploitation does not happen of participants and of consumers. And if you'd spent as much time as I have working with survivors of the multi-billion pound global sex industry, you'd understand why I feel so strongly that the current more or less non-existent regulation isn't doing the job and big change is needed.

Mostly though I am just bragging that I met Richard Dawkins and then he wrote about me and about what I said! Yippee!

Witch Magazine

2012-02-17T14:04:00.002Z

This video of Charlie Brooker attacking The Sun newspaper for it's hypocrisy is great. Well worth a watch.

However I must add that Mr Brooker is in fact wrong. The Sun HAS gone after actual witches too. For example here in an article about pagan police officer.

Dawkins and me

2012-02-09T00:19:00.001Z

Very excited to announce that on Saturday I shall be speaking at the Free Expression Day of Action outside parliament. So is Richard Dawkins! (Giggles excitedly!) And loads and loads of other cool people. You should come, info here!

Fun, grump, fun

2012-02-02T23:51:00.004Z

So firstly I had such a wonderful time in Sweden it's not true. Thanks so much to all the lovely people who put me on and up and entertained me. Malmo Comedy Festival was ace. Of course I only understood the English-speaking acts but really blown away by Al Pitcher who really performed his socks off! He's touring Sweden soon so if you are based there do get a ticket. Then El Mundo which is really the most fun little gig in Stockholm (sorry to all the others including Maffia, which I did the next day and was also ace but lots of acts so the audience got a bit tired plus my stupid projector spontaneously stopped working which didn't help my set). Then last night I was taken out to perform at a show at a small town called Gavla (sorry, can't do Swedish characters on my English keyboard, the first "a" should have two little dots over it, as should the "o" at the end of Malmo!) about two hours drive north of Stockholm, into a proper blizzard, which was a real adventure and I really enjoyed!

So then the grump: BBC London Eddie Nestor's show. I was invited to go on air by phone and discuss whether the House of Commons should be serving "Top Tottie" beer and whether it's ok for bus drivers to call female passengers "love" and "darling". So far so good. Eddie asks me a question, I make a few points, he then asks the other guest. I let her make a couple of points, then she says something I disagree with strongly (that it's a small issue and I should instead be campaigning on more serious issues, except I AM campaigning on other issues and SHE'S NOT, in fact she's campaigning AGAINST making an improvement on this small issue and doing NO WORK AT ALL on big issues). So I speak up. She carries on talking. Not talking over me, just talking... Gradually I started to realise she couldn't hear me. I thought maybe my phone was playing up. So I'm shouting "HELLO, HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR ME?", nothing. Well I figure they'll spot the problem soon enough since I'm not audible to them. Goes on and on. Eventually I realise they've deliberately switched my mic off. I figure they'll have left it so the presenter can hear I want to come in and he'll come to me shortly. Nothing, nothing, nothing. By this stage I'm shouting "Eddie - can I come in on this point please? Eddie?Eddie?". Then finally he comes to me, but with a completely new question - he obviously hasn't heard a thing I've said. I get a few seconds then suddenly "Thanks very much to both of you, goodbye". Well (1) what's the point in having a debate unless you actually let the debate happen. Fair enough to turn one person down a bit or say "Hang on Kate, let my other guest finish her point" or whatever, but switching the mic right off and ignoring one of the guests for several minutes? And (2) from a listeners perspective (probably assuming we're all in the studio) it sounds as though I just agree with or have no answer to all the points made. Including the ones grossly misrepresenting what I've said or who I am! And (3) by not even telling me what they were going to do I had no idea how much of what I'd said had been audible to listeners so when they did come back to me I didn't know what points I'd already made!! Well I've complained, there's probably a link on their website but I'm not going looking for it to listen to myself being ignored. I'll see what they say before I make a decision about whether or not to go on the show again. There are lots of totally ace BBC London shows - like Kath Melandri and Nikki Bedi and I've loved working with Jazzy B when he's been guest presenting - so I'll maybe stick to them in future.

And back to fun. King's College Philosophy Society booked me to do an hour of political feminist atheist lefty comedy for them tonight and with awesome support acts and a really smart, enthusiastic crowd it was a lot of fun. And on top of that a whole ton of people have been on Twitter recommending I be invited to be a guest on QI (they've been asking for suggestions @qikipedia, my Twitter account is @Cruella1 if you want to follow me or talk at or about me!). I would love to be on that show, would really suit me I think. That and Question Time!

I bash the bishop!

2012-01-26T15:58:00.003Z

Ha ha, dying to use that title!! And luckily it's very justified today. I got a last minute call to appear on BBC Radio Wales phone-in show with presenter Jason Mohammad. Up for discussion is the presence of 26 (ha ha - I say on air it's "about 25" and even the "top" historian on the show doesn't correct me!) male, Church of England bishops in the House of Lords. As well as a range of callers I also get to argue with historian Martin Farr, a vicar (can't figure out who) and an actual bishop (pictured) - Bishop Gregory Cameron. Anyway you've got 7 days to listen to is again. It's a good one, I think! The Listen Again link is here.

Dear Money Advice Service

2012-01-25T17:56:00.002Z

You may all have seen the expensive television adverts urging members of the public worried about their finances to contact the government's free independent Money Advice Service. So I did...

"Hi, I'm wondering if you can help me. My friend runs a money-lending business that is badly managed and has been giving money to people who can't afford to pay it back and ripping people off with fees and so on. He's going bankrupt so I offered to give him £10,000 to help him out. To save the money I'm planning to stop giving £2 a week to my disabled friend who has two small children to raise on her own. Is this a good idea? Many thanks Kate"

I'll let you know if they get back to me.

That irrefutable evidence for God in full...

2012-01-25T16:56:00.002Z

[for the benefit of those living overseas or who missed The Big Questions on January 15th or the iPlayer version while it was up]

Are you unconvinced about the existence of God? Sceptical about claims of supernatural beings, miracles, virgin births, spiritual dimensions and an afterlife? Well great news. BBC One went to the trouble to invite a wide range of people from a variety of faiths and denominations and giving them a whole hour to present this gripping evidence in front of a handful of atheists: me, evolutionary biologist Diana Fleischman, Prof Peter Atkins and journalist David Aaronovitch.

Key highlights include:

"There's no evolutionary basis for altruism" Yes there is, it helps the survival of those around you, all of whom will be carrying at least some of your genes.

"I just feel like there's a God-shaped gap in my life" Yes many people feel things like loneliness or insecurity. But the presence of a void doesn't prove the existence of something that fills that void. By that argument ever colander is a bowl. [Also if you believe every hole should be filled - that's a pro-rape argument, though I didn't say anything so shocking on the show!]

"I know God exists from the really strong feeling I get when I see a landscape or hear great music". Right what about when you have an orgasm? Is that a strong enough feeling? And if God gave you the joy of music, she must have also given you that feeling of nausea when you see maggots. [Actually Diana Fleischman had just come from a conference on disgust!]

"When personal tragedy struck, I wanted God to exist and so I decided to believe" Does this have anything to do with evidence? "No". Ok.

"God appeared to me personally when I was in prison for committing hundreds of crimes and spoke to me (in English)" Shame she didn't show up BEFORE you ruined all those victims' lives.

Here's what didn't happen:

"I prayed to Allah and my amputated leg grew back"

"Jesus spoke to me in a dream and here he is, I brought him on TV with me, so you can all see it wasn't a hallucination"

Also as previously discussed, this is the episode where I compare the Qu'ran to Harry Potter. Deep apologies to Harry Potter fans everywhere!

Enjoy!

For Overseas Readers

2012-01-16T19:56:00.005Z

Finally the best bit (I think) of the debate from The Big Questions on 8th Jan has appeared magically on YouTube. So here it is!!

Time to Tune In

2012-01-15T18:06:00.004Z

So firstly The Big Questions episode where I'm debating whether there's any evidence for God is up here. And BBC London's Lady Lounge with me chatting to Kath Melandri is also up here, I arrive about 33m in but stay for an hour and a half.

Both will be up for a week, neither can be accessed outside the UK unless you are an IT wizz. Sometimes highlight-y type clips appear on YouTube. Enjoy!

The Big Questions: What You Missed, The Qu'ran, Harry Potter

2012-01-15T01:13:00.003Z

I'm on The Big Questions again tomorrow morning. It's already been recorded so I know what happens. A couple of comments:

(1) I spend a lot of time with my hand in the air trying to get them to come to me. There were a ton of things I wanted to say, but didn't get the chance. In particular I was really angered by the people suggesting evidence for God exists in the sense of wonder we feel at the beauty of a landscape, etc. Well firstly if God made those then God also made the sense of revulsion we feel at maggots or faeces. Secondly there are clear, easy to identify, evolutionary benefits to having a good feeling when you are able to survey a large area of territory and identify food sources, potential dangers, enemies and fresh water sources. Doh! But thirdly and more to the point, if a great feeling makes you believe in God, why does orgasm not do it? Most people I know would gladly trade a bit of scenery for great sex...

(2) Even before the show goes out there appears to be "scandal" on Twitter over the notion that I compare the Qu'ran to Harry Potter. That is taking things a little out of context. A Muslim guy said that the Bible had discrepancies in it but that the Qu'ran doesn't contradict itself so it must be true. Now there were plenty of experts on hand to point out there are numerous discrepancies in the Qu'ran. My point is that a lack of discrepancies doesn't make something true. Neither Harry Potter nor Lord of the Rings contradicts itself, so are they true too?

That's my point (as you'll see tomorrow 10am BBC One). For the record I would never be so rude as to compare Harry Potter to the Qu'ran - after all Harry Potter is an entertaining read with only mild overtones of sexism*!

*Footnote: Hermione is the smart one. Why is she not the hero?

Sexual imbalance

2012-01-12T01:36:00.003Z

Dear BBC, I know it can be hard to tell what is and isn't news. Let me help. This isn't. It's a video story by a woman and has the title "Why I had sex with 40 men I met online". Reading the details she met these men over a period of around 7 or 8 years. That's about 5 men per year, less than one every two months. Lots of women have that many sexual partners. And meeting them online doesn't make it any more or less of an issue, meeting people online is not really any different from meeting people at a party or in a bar. In fact if anything it gives you an opportunity to find out more about someone - reading through their profile and asking questions - before committing to meeting and it reduces the risk your judgement is impaired by alcohol or other drugs.*

If there is a (fairly small) story here it's that she started doing this when she was 15. The men she met at this time are legally rapists. Where is the documentary that tracks them down and asks them what the hell they were doing? Instead it asks why she did it - SHE didn't, SHE was too young to consent. THEY did it...

Also today on the BBC is this story: a documentary has been made about comedian Jeff Leach and the fact that he says he's had sex with 300 women. I've met Jeff once or twice on the comedy circuit but not really enough to have an opinion about his work (or to number among his bedpost notches). So how is it news for a man to have 300 partners but for a woman to have had just 40 partners?

The discrepancy is repeated in the middle of the article "It's said the average British man has had 13 sexual partners and women have had just seven.". Ok so men are having twice as many sexual partners as women? Are British men having as much gay sex as straight sex? Or are they having more than half of their sexual encounters while on holiday in the rest of the world? Seriously THE NUMBERS DON'T ADD UP. IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!

To be honest I don't think there's really anything shocking about having had 300 sexual partners. Of course if Jeff is unhappy about being promiscuous and wants to stop but finds it hard (ooh err) to do so, he can seek help, and if the BBC thinks that's an interesting topic for documentary, they can make it. But the whole project seems to me to come with the implicit message that promiscuity is automatically shameful and wrong. The tabloids are full of this: words like "cottaging", "dogging" and "wife-swapping" are treated as shocking and shameful despite the fact that none implies any co-ercion or dangerous or dishonest behaviour.

Personally I think if you're honest with people, practice safe sex and are careful not to take advantage of people who are drunk or otherwise vulnerable - do what you like!

*As a footnote we are always told about the dangers of meeting people online. It's presumed to be easier online to misrepresent yourself (i.e. pretend to be younger, etc than you really are) but frankly lots of people do that in real life. Most sites recommend meeting people you've met online in a public place and while there may be benefits to that I tend to think it sends out two very unhelpful messages: (1) you can identify a rapist or violent person by looking at them or briefly speaking to them and (2) if things turn nasty after you've agreed to go somewhere private with someone, it's your own fault.

No, Daily Mail, No

2012-01-05T23:40:00.004Z

In answer to Liz Thomas's question in today's F(em)ail section: Is this the ultimate woman?

Firstly - cutting out bits of different women and sticking them together is ikky.

Secondly - ultimate for what? Triathlon? Or fulfilling men's sexual fantasies? I even think that's insulting to men.

Thirdly - if you are actually going to date, or even just have sex with, this woman she might need some sort of intellect, ability to talk, sense of humour, compassion, enthusiasm, generosity.

Fourthly - oops boys, she might have Kate Middleton's hair and Gwyneth Paltrow's chin but she also has: no vagina. This will really spoil your afternoon plans.

Fifthly - CGI is odd. She looks weird.

And sixth and finally for crying out loud - being a woman is not a competition!

But in case I'm not being clear - here a quick line-by-line on the actual article:

"Each stands alone as one of the world’s most beautiful women."

Highly subjective who are the worlds "most beautiful women" isn't it. Interestingly for a paper that really hates racism the women in question are all white and you don't even mention the message this sends out to your impressionable (lets hope not) readers.

"So put them all together and the result would surely be the ultimate head-turner. Or would it?"

And do note that the "ultimate head turner" is now the same thing as the "ultimate woman", jeez, at least in the old days you got extra marks for baking.

"Well now, thanks to the wonders of modern technology, you can judge for yourself."

The Daily Mail invites you to judge bits of chopped up women. Roll up now. Is there a raffle afterwards?

"Beneath the Duchess of Cambridge’s tumbling shiny hair, you will find the chocolate brown eyes of singer Cheryl Cole, the nose of actress Kate Beckinsale and the cheeks of fellow Hollywood star Keira Knightley."

If you find Cheryl Cole's eyes and Kate Beckinsale's nose under Kate Middleton's hair - they're having a lesbian threesome (and lets be honest willingness to participate in a threesome is on quite a few men, and women's "ultimate qualities" list). Otherwise you're looking at a CGI image made by some computer nerds who were probably touching themselves at the time.

"Eyebrows come courtesy of Transformers actress Megan Fox and the perfect chin is apparently found on still another actress, Gwyneth Paltrow."

Yes, of course, the kind of men who turn their heads to gawp at women really care about this stuff. I often go past a building site and hear "phoar - look at the chin on that" and "I bet those eyebrows would look great next to a robot that turns into a car". I mean really Liz, you know there is actual news out there. You could report that. Or do voluntary work. Maybe with dangerous animals...

"Those bee-stung lips could only be Angelina Jolie’s, and the ultimate celebrity’s decolletage belongs to busty TV presenter Kelly Brook."

I quote again my local building firm "phoar, she's got a cracking pair of decolletages". We all know you mean tits. Stop pretending you're anything but creepy quasi-porn.

"The inclusion of Prince William’s new wife in the poll of more than 9,000 people – by online beauty retailer Feel Unique – is no surprise."

Nor is your newspaper printing nasty objectifying non-news articles based on pointless surveys conducted as a means of generating free publicity for corporations.

"Her perfectly coiffeured curls have been credited with everything from a boom in hair products to an increase in women dyeing their hair brown."

To recap that's EVERYTHING FROM a boom in hair products TO an increase in women dyeing their hair brown? Is brown hair dye not a "hair product"? What are all the other things that Kate Middleton has been credited with? Did she win the Nobel Peace Prize or the Winter Olympics downhill ski slalom? No? Didn't think so. How about writing an article about the women who have done these things?!

(footnote: they are Maria Höfl-Riesch and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and one of them is the world's first black female president, isn't that a bit more "ultimate" than having cheekbones like Keira Knightley?)

Sunday Sunday

2012-01-05T19:58:00.000Z

By the way I'll be back on The Big Questions (with it's fancy new format) this Sunday for the first episode of the new series BBC One, 10am!

Date for your diary!

2012-01-05T13:50:00.000Z

Protesting Nadine Dorries new bill to bring abstinence-only sex ed to girls (yes, just girls, boys are to be told "go for it, get as much tail as you can"). And I will be speaking at the rally outside parliament!

Radio round-up

2012-01-04T22:19:00.005Z

Had a busy couple of days radio-wise. Yesterday night I was on BBC Five Live on the Tony Livesey show talking about new year's resolutions. I was slightly playing devil's advocate here arguing against them. I don't think they're necessarily a bad thing but I do think if you want to change your life you might as well start right away. It's up as usual on listen again here, starting at 2h10m into the show. The funniest thing (to my mind) is that Tony Livesey seems tired on air (for him, he's usually more high energy, and in fairness it was nearly 1am not long after New Year's Eve party season) and for a while it feels as if it's me interviewing the callers!!

This morning at 8.10am I was on BBC Lincolnshire's Breakfast Show talking about road crossing signs in the area which now say "wait for the green figure" rather than "wait for the green man" and whether this is political correctness gone mad. The point is rather moot since the local guy who put the signs up says he was just using the wording that's in the highway code. Amazingly (for a regional station) BBC Lincolnshire's shows are up on iPlayer so you can listen to it here, starting at 2h13m into the show.

Then at 9.45am the most infuriating interview in a long time on BBC Ulster. The statistics we are all supposed to be shocked about are that in the last 3 years about 150 children in Northern Ireland have been diagnosed with an STI. Now unfortunately the woman I was "debating" with was an abstinence-only sex ed teacher and advocate who was straight up determined not to let me get a word in edgeways. But anyway lets look at the numbers first:

150 children with an STI in 3 years. That's 50 per year. Northern Ireland has a population of 1.5m of which around 24% are under 16. So there are 360,000 children living in Northern Ireland. Broad, but conservative, estimates suggest 9.2% of children are sexually abused in Europe (two thirds to three quarters of them female for the record). So that's 33,120 sexually abused children in Northern Ireland. Of whom, in a year, 50 are being diagnosed with an STI, or one in 662. That's very low considering some estimates think as many as 1 in 10 sexually active people in the UK have chlamydia.

Of course it's not good news. If anything it's worrying news because in all likelihood with the prevalence of "unseen" (initially) STIs like chlamydia, syphilis and HIV there are lots more who are not being diagnosed.

But instead of looking at the facts and possibilities for improving diagnosis rates and tackling child abuse, dah-dah! This woman has "decided" the problem is that no-one has told our young people (especially those pesky girls who hang out with older guys) to say "no". Of course it's rather missing the point. No matter how many times a 15-year-old says "yes" to you: you are still not allowed to have sex with them. That's why it's called statutory rape, because it just IS rape, no matter what the other details of the situation.

The problems with abstinence-only sex education are so fundamental it's not true. I mean firstly there is extensive evidence it doesn't work. They did it in the US and the data shows it doesn't reduce the rates of STIs or teen pregnancies and it does delay young people from seeking help when worried about these issues. But it's even less complicated than that. Young people grow into adults. We keep young people ignorant, we end up with ignorant adults. We all make bad choices sometimes but once we become adults we're allowed to make bad choices. I know in my life I've made some GREAT bad choices! Ultimately, armed with accurate information about contraception, safe sex and relationships - sex is a lot of awesome fun. The buggers will work it out eventually if we don't tell them and then they'll never trust us again!

You can listen again as usual though I warn it is a LOT of me shouting over the world's most infuriating woman [or, depending on your perspective, a brilliant abstinence-only sex educator shouting over the world's most infuriating woman]. The link is here and my part starts 45m in to the show.

Finally and for me most enjoyably I was on On.FM this afternoon - it's an independent Hammersmith radio station but releases it's shows as podcasts for download wherever you are. I was on it debating abortion a few weeks ago on a different show. The show I was on today is really about interviewing comedians but the presenters gave me a shout in advance of my scheduled slot because they're fans of the Atheist B!tchslap and asked if I fancied doing the show with a Christian comedienne called Joy Carter (who I've worked with before) so we could have a bit of a debate about religion. Of course I said yes. It's a lot of fun. For a whole hour! Only thing is the podcast's not up yet. Sneak preview though: there's still no god! Here's the link to where it will be though - I'll put it up on Facebook and Twitter tomorrow when it's out.

Cool Postcard

2012-01-03T01:27:00.003Z

Stephen Jesse made this cool postcard based loosely on what I said on The Big Questions last time (in the Atheist B!tchslap clip).

Rachel Maddow on abortion in the US

2012-01-02T00:38:00.002Z

Conscience Choice

2012-01-01T20:05:00.002Z

Interesting blog post from Labour MP Kerry McCarthy about parliamentary votes that are generally unwhipped on the grounds that they constitute "votes of consciousness". I have added a comment which may make it through moderation but just in case here are my thoughts:

If MPs deferred to the wishes of their voters on abortion - after all they are supposed to represent the views of their constitutents - all MPs would vote pro-choice. Personally I see abortion as a human rights matter (ditto gay rights, trans rights, etc) so I think it should be whipped by any party that considers themselves compassionate and just. One in 8 pregnancies worldwide ends in illegal abortion, at a cost of thousands of women’s lives, so it's a big human rights issue too.

I also really don’t understand the idea that anti-choicers are voting based on their religion. No-one I have ever met believes that if I arrive at the pearly gates and say “I don’t believe in God, but I didn’t have an abortion because it was illegal”, they are going to let me in.

Extended holiday listening...

2011-12-21T06:01:00.002Z

Gosh can't the holidays drag? Well fear not. A full two-hour show I did on On.FM about abortion is up on Mix Cloud. It was a debate show with two guests on each "side", but I think I do the majority of the talking. Its so long it's in two parts. Part one and part two. That's a lot of listening though so I won't be offended if you-all don't finish!! Net conclusion: I'm right! Well actually the whole debate is rather "over" first when the anti-choice man (yes, man!) says he opposes all sex outside of marriage, and all sex not for procreation purposes, and all forms of contraception. And second, it's all over again when the host reveals his own mother died from a backstreet abortion.

Festive good will!

2011-12-21T05:40:00.003Z

Here's an article and a picture of me doing a festive comedy engagement workshop with a group of older people in Oval. I do quite a few of these though Silver Comedy around London and they're really fun for me and the participants! Do get in touch with George (who runs Silver Comedy) if you know of a residential centre or a drop-in or community centre that would be interested in holding one.

Christmas thank you list

2011-12-20T00:03:00.005Z

I thought I would write my Christmas thank you list earlier this year. I was thinking about the how some of the most vilified people in our society actually are doing incredibly important work. So thank you to:

1) Health and safety inspectors. Yes some of us appreciate living in a society where children aren't allowed to be send up chimneys and scaffolding can't be made out of cheese. Is it getting in the way of your massive corporations mega-profits? Oh well maybe don't put your employees at risk then, no?

2) No-win, no fee lawyers. Legal aid is harder and harder to get hold of in this country and there's a recession on so less and less people can afford legal support when they've been injured or ripped off. If you've had a serious injury and are having difficulty getting back to work the financial distress can be huge. So if that injury was caused by negligence or dangerous behaviour you're entitled to get some compensation. If it's not a real case, judges can throw it out.

3) Chuggers - aka "charity muggers" the people who accost you in the street and ask you to sign up to charitable direct debit commitments. Yes, I know, I've sworn at them sometimes too, especially the animal charity ones! But the point remains - charities desperately need money. I'd much rather they were in the street than going door-to-door and waking me up. And regular direct debit donations are a much better way of funding charities, giving them long term funding and predictability of income. If you don't like being interrupted in the street or worry about the amount of your donation that might end up in the chugger's pocket (though they're entitled to earn a living too!) why not find a couple of good causes and sign up online now? How about Eaves Housing who support women who have been trafficked to the UK and Wateraid who build water and sanitation pipelines in the third world?

So thanks very much to those much-maligned people!

I've been super-busy the last few months both with the never-ending excitement about the Atheist Bitchslap and with a gruelling touring schedule for a variety of reasons. So I'm taking Christmas off now (though I will moderate comments, etc every couple of days) and leaving town for a little bit. My plan is not to perform while I'm away but if any blog/bitchslap fans are in L.A. and want to arrange a festive drinks night, please get in touch.

Happy Winterval all!!

Sermonising

2011-12-18T17:17:00.001Z

So London Green/green online magazine The Big Smoke asked me to write a Sunday Sermon. So I did. You can read it here!

More radio spots

2011-12-16T16:46:00.002Z

So yesterday I was on two different national BBC radio shows. Firstly the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio Two, where we discussed the paucity of coverage of women's sports in the media. You can listen again here for seven days - my part starts just after 1h36minutes in to the show - and one little note, after the discussion Jeremy thanks me and it sounds like I'm leaving but actually I ended up staying and discussing some of the texts and calls that came in.

Then in the evening I was on the Tony Livesey Show on BBC Radio Five. We were talking about Micheal Buble and his use of "bad" language onstage. I'm on from 54minutes into the show on this one and again it's up on listen again here for seven days.

I also performed last night at The Laugh Goodbye - a benefit gig for mental health charity MIND in memory of Mackenzie Taylor, an incredibly talented performer and a good friend of mine who lost his battle with mental illness and committed suicide last year. Sorry if you missed it - it was completely sold out and a lot of money raised. At the end of the show in an echo of something Mackenzie did onstage at a show once the comics were brought back onstage and the right to spank us was auctioned off for the charity. Mine raised a rather measly £10... It was an amazing night though so I was really glad to have been a part of it.

Diversity audit on music blog...

2011-12-06T14:17:00.004Z

This blog post seems to have been doing the rounds today: 12 extremely disappointing facts about popular music. It's about how some acts of dubious quality hyped up by the music industry have outsold some "classic" acts. But check out the subliminal sexism...

Of the 12 examples:

Men who "shouldn't have been" more popular than other men: 3

Men who "shouldn't have been" more popular than mixed sex groups: 0

Men who "shouldn't have been" more popular than women: 0

Mixed sex groups who "shouldn't have been" more popular than men: 2

Mixed sex groups who "shouldn't have been" more popular than other mixed sex groups: 0

Mixed sex groups who "shouldn't have been" more popular than women: 0

Women who "shouldn't have been" more popular than men: 6

Women who "shouldn't have been" more popular than mixed sex groups: 0

Women who "shouldn't have been" more popular than other women: 0

And of course: jokes about Justin Beiber: 1

Including Beiber there are 12 acts who they are suggesting are over-rated, or deserved less success: 6 solo women, 2 mixed sex groups and 4 solo guys. And there are 15 acts who they are suggesting are under-rated, or deserved more success: 100% male.

Maybe the most disappointing fact about popular music is that in the 21st century brilliant female acts still find it incredibly difficult to be taken seriously.

Which is a miserable note to end on, so instead I'll leave you with proof that women have been rocking out pretty damn hard for a long long time... Sister Rosetta Tharpe, I particularly urge you to pay attention to the guitar solo she launches into about 1m20 in. But frankly the whole thing is a joy!

More radio, Ada Lovelace and less Clarkson (please?!)

2011-12-03T00:13:00.007Z

Well I hate to say I told you so (I don't, I love it) but three year's ago I wrote an article called "I HATE Jeremy Clarkson", and today 21,000 complainers to the BBC agree with me. I was invited on the BBC Wales phone-in show with Jason Mohammed to discuss it at length (for a whole hour!). It'll be available for 7 days to "listen again" here, I'm on throughout the first hour.

[Celeb gossip aside - when I arrived at the BBC studios there were tons of paparazzi outside, apparently they were hoping to catch both Chris Martin and Jessica Biel who were coming in for interviews. Both came and went while I was on air, so I didn't get to hang out, they could probably see I was busy!]

Another lengthy item for your listening pleasure, finally up online is the show I hosted celebrating women in technology for Ada Lovelace Day. It was recorded by the ace Pod Delusion team who I have given interviews and soundbites to before on other subjects. I am on and off doing bits and bobs as host throughout but you'll also get to hear Maggie Philbin, Gia Milinovich, Helen Arney, Sue Black and Suw Charman-Anderson who are all fascinating.

Finally just now I was on George Galloway's TalkSport show discussing how totally rubbish it is that the Sports Personality of the Year Awards shortlist is 100% male. They don't have a function to replay it but the clips often show up on YouTube, let me know if you find it!! Basic conclusion: Yes it's rubbish. The nominations are chosen by a range of sports editors including those working at "Lad Mags" (i.e. soft porn and misogyny titles like Nuts and Zoo) and even the supposedly mainstream sports editors cover basically no women's sports aside from the Olympics and Wimbledon. Plus there's a lack of funding for grassroots level sports across the board, but especially girls. And with eating disorders and obesity at epidemic levels it needs sorting out. The end.

Oh and footnote on the general internet abuse situation. The response on Twitter to my remarks suggesting Clarkson shouldn't have said the horrid things he said about striking public sector workers:

ChriisMorgan67 Chris Morgan

@Cruella1 love to track you down and give a good slap bitch

6 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

And footnote 2: Thanks a gazillion to photographer Charlotte Barnes who took the photo at the top of me leading the march at Reclaim The Night 2011. I love it!!

Josie's words

2011-11-21T03:31:00.003Z

Incidentally I agree with every word of what Josie Long says about women in comedy. Listen here.

Fawcett March and some radio clips

2011-11-20T19:29:00.004Z

Yesterday the Fawcett Society organised a rally to protest the disproportionate way in which women are being affected by the cuts. I was asked to speak afterwards at the rally about the threat to reproductive and abortion rights. I am mentioned in the Morning Star newspaper.

I was also on BBC radio 5 Live Weekend Breakfast show yesterday talking about internet abuse. You can "listen again" here starting at 2h43m in to the show. Since then I've been discussing it a bit on Twitter with Dr Evan Harris and others. The question of what can be done about it is a tricky one. Certainly I get quite a lot of messages that are definitely the wrong side of the law - especially if they contain specific threats. But I don't really have time to launch a police case every time this happens. When I have contacted the police - they've been rubbish and done nothing. And for the general hate messages there is the issue that people are entitled to free speech but it also seems unfair that I, and hundreds and thousands of other women with an online presence (plus, I must add ethnic minority, gay, trans, etc bloggers who I'm sure get plenty of crap too) have to wade through this stuff in our inboxes every morning. We know young people have been driven to suicide by Internet bullying. My solution as ever is to tackle the hate culture, not the expression of it. But seems like not much progress is being made on that front either!

And this morning - yes that was me on BBC Radio Ulster debating whether single women should be allowed IVF on the NHS. Can't believe we're still having this debate really. Why would a health service offer "moral" or relationship advice. Loads of single women are great mothers and if they're coming for IVF it's not like they haven't given the matter serious consideration... And who wants to turn down the recently widowed, or a woman who's just escaped domestic violence? We have to trust women to decide what's best for them.

Anyway the most fun bit was that right towards the end the woman I was debating with opined that single women shouldn't be allowed to have IVF kids because it was against the bible's model of a family. Well it was left to me to point out that not everyone in the UK shares her religious perspective and blah blah blah. Anyway just as the interview was ending I casually mentioned that there is no God. Good morning Northern Ireland and you're welcome!! Sorry it's not available on iPlayer.

Footnote: thanks Paul - I stand corrected (and pleased) - you can listen to the Radio Ulster debate show here. My bit starts from 34m in and skip forward to 44m is you just want to hear my big finish!

New Statesman piece about me and other blogstresses.

2011-11-04T00:18:00.001Z

I'm featured in a piece in the New Statesman today about internet abuse. You can read it here.

City Academy Plug

2011-10-30T11:27:00.002Z

During a discussion about the forthcoming Squeakies movie on the Sunny and Shay show on BBC London last night one of the producers gives a lovely plug for the comedy course I teach at City Academy and how great my students are (I agree). You can listen again here and the bit where I'm mentioned starts at 1h44m in.

I'll add a couple of points about comedy courses, cos there seem to be some FAQs...

1) Can you really teach someone to be funny?

I don't really subscribe to this notion that people "just are" or "just aren't" funny. We all have different senses of humour. A course can definitely help you explore your sense of humour and different ways of bringing it across onstage. And if you met someone who wasn't a very good singer - would you tell them not to take a singing course? No - lots of people enjoy learning about singing, practising and performing to friends, anyone who fancies it should give it a try. Ditto comedy.

2) Surely you'd learn more by getting onstage and doing it?

You can certainly learn a lot by doing gigs, yes, and if that's how you'd prefer to learn no-one is stopping you. New act nights can be tough though - small distracted audiences, badly set-up rooms, and often they can be unreceptive to anything a bit different. If you can learn it in front of an audience, why not learn it in front of your classmates with the help of a professional comic as a teacher.

3) Do you just teach people to be like you?

Well I worry about that but I try very hard not to - I try very hard to provide skills and tools and techniques that can be applied to a wide range of acts. Some of my ex-students do character comedy, some do puns, there's a fair range...

4) What if I just want to boost confidence and presenting skills?

Yes, definitely, got a best man/woman speech or work awards do coming up? I can help. One-on-one or join a class.

5) What has happened to your ex-students? Are they all famous yet?

I've only been teaching just over a year - give them a chance - but some of them are doing really well. Here's a clip of one of my graduates Stephen Bailey performing in a pub in Manchester, if you're interested.

Funnily (sort of) enough the comedy course is one of the City Academy courses most often bought as a gift for a friend, which is quite a sweet way of saying "You've got a lot of interesting stories to tell, give it a go!". The link to City Academy website is above if you are now itching to sign up...! I promise you'll have fun.

My Atheist B*tchslap and the Internet

2011-10-26T19:51:00.008+01:00

Most of my regular readers (hello new people and welcome) will know that I've been a fairly frequent guest on BBC One's religious debate show The Big Questions. My most recent appearance culminated in me calling religious people "idiots". At the time unsurprisingly the assembled religious leaders who were on the show reacted as if I'd defecated on the studio floor. But I wasn't really expecting the general public to have that much of a reaction to the clip. I mean "idiots" is hardly the harshest insult. At very least it's the sort of insult that goes out on BBC One on a Sunday morning.

However recently when looking for the clip to show to a friend I noticed something: it's gone a bit viral. Well actually a lot viral. It's on YouTube several times and now it's on ebaumsworld which is a very high traffic site. There are various versions of the clip - this is a fairly extended version, showing the debate before and after my "idiots" comment:

This clip also has a fairly generic title. Most places have titled it "Atheist B*tchslap". I generally think the term "b*tch" is an unpleasant one, but in this case it seems to be being used positively so I don't mind.

Anyway here's the thing. Between all the various places it's been put up, it's had over 250,000 views. Yes - quarter of a million views and counting. I rather wish whoever has been posting it up would put my name, twitter tag and blog site in the title so people can find me and follow me and come to my comedy shows. But hey, I guess I'll just get a T-Shirt printed up with "Atheist B*tchslap" on it and that should jog people's memories!

And here's the other thing. As you may know I moderate comment on here and on my YouTube channel. I didn't for a long time but there were some particularly nasty internet trolls who would repeatedly post up the most horrible things and I just wanted my readers to feel they could read my site safely. I still approve comments from those who disagree with me, just not those who are creepy and threatening and all that sort of thing.

Of course on the wider Internet I don't get to moderate these things. In particular ebaumsworld clearly has no policy for moderation and doesn't even have a "report this comment" or a function that allows a comment to be hidden if a large number of people have "dislike"-d it. And it's getting pretty ugly. Trigger warning - I'm going to quote some of the comments (asterisks are mine, mostly to stop my page being blocked for anyone with a half decent Internet firewall).

"IF THIS TRASH TALKING K*NT HAD HER F*CKNG

TONGUE RIPPED OUT OF HER SUCK-HOLE, I BET THE
VERY FIRST WORDS TO LEAVE HER FACE WOULD BE

"OH-MY-GOD""

Mmm, that was from the reassuringly-named ebaumsworld commenter "pygmiesrfun". And here's "southernguy3030" to remind us how kind and compassionate religious people are:

"She will remember those words when she faced

God. Have fun burning in Hell."

And this one:

"she looks like a lesbian b*tch anyways"

Ah yes that age-old insult "looking like a lesbian". I'm hoping that user "Montreal" means like a cross between Amber Heard and Tegen and Sara. That would be AWESOME! And someone else who spent a long time choosing a username: "sh*tpuppet" wants to be clear it's not just lesbians he has the problem with:

"No you're a woman right? Therefore by

induction, you're an idiot."

The fact that his sentence doesn't even make sense (induction?) really backs up his point too... But just cos you're educated enough to be pedantic about language doesn't make you a very nice person either. Look here's "jteague" with his/her insightful spelling advice:

"atheist not athiest. tard"

I think "tard" is actually short for "retard"!!? Seriously - that'a apparently a hip insult now and not in the least bit insulting to people with learning difficulties. Someone call Ricky Gervais... On the subject of spelling mistakes lets get back to the threats of violence. This one is from "canadianbeer":

"She needs to be gang reaped."

And atheists can be horrifically sexist too remember, thanks "mrcronic":

"so from now on when a make a chick have an

abortion ill just tell her the babys going to

heaven"

And guess what peacemakers like "Skab" want to do to end fighting between atheists and religious people:

"Here's a solution that can unite all the

religious f*cks. Gang-b*ng her in a rainbow

unity and problem solved."

I'm only about a third of the way through the comments, and even then there's loads more I could post up, but I think that's enough to show I'm presenting a general trend, not just a couple of isolated idiots.

I guess three points:

(1) The anonymity and freedom of speech afforded by the Internet certainly have their benefits, as we've seen with the Arab Spring and reaction to suppression of news about human rights abuses in China, etc. But in general, my advice is, if you've got a site - moderate it... You can just glance at stuff and approve everything that isn't overtly horrid (note: there is also some nasty racism on the comments, aimed at the black people shown and at the Muslim guy). With a smart phone you can do it on-the-go so as not to stifle debate too much. Or failing that leave up a way for people to highlight comments they think should be removed and have a check through. I'm sure these guys didn't mean for their site to become a haven for hate speech.

(2) Interesting to see how a lot of people actually feel. I know almost no-one would say these horrid things to my face. So in a sense it's good that the Internet lets women and other groups see how much some people really hate us.

(3) Interesting and horrifying how quickly it all comes back to rape time after time. There are also a fair few people complaining that the clip doesn't show the "b*tch" actually getting slapped and posted by people who were clearly looking for pornography. If anyone ever tells you we don't live in a "rape culture" world - show them this. It's frightening but it does highlight the need for action to bring about dramatic change.

And let me add one very important thing about the clip. The show has tagged me as "National Secular Society" IN ERROR. I am a member, which clearly they have in their notes somewhere, but I'm not in any way a spokesperson for them... I'm just a spokesperson for me in the clip.

News at Kate - Occupy Wall Street

2011-10-14T03:46:00.002+01:00

I made a little vlog about the Occupy Wall Street protests. Enjoy!

I might make some more of these... If anyone has requests on subjects I might discuss, let me know (no promises). Cheers.

Edinburgh Last Night (or the night before)

2011-10-13T15:02:00.005+01:00

Also discovered a little clip of me performing and then chatting at Edinburgh Tonight with Joe Simmons and Lorraine Chase in August. And my mum is in the audience and gets to join in too.

Squeaking On

2011-10-13T01:52:00.005+01:00

The trailer has been released for a film which I appear in. I'm in the film as myself, as a contestant in a comedy competition which is the centrepiece of the film. Some of the other contestants are played by an ex student of mine and my husband, good luck guessing which is which! But all you'll see in the trailer is a bit of well done slapstick (mostly care of my good friend Mark Felgate, who is the one with no trousers!) and my face for about half a second. Still don't miss out...

Jobs for Girls

2011-10-06T15:32:00.002+01:00

Well the Cru-blog has certainly been written of my Mac and my iPhone for a long time. But I don't have anything particular to add to the discussion of Steve Jobs' death. It's sad when someone dies, of course, whatever their role in life. There isn't really anything else to say.

Naturally enough though, the media is in need of something to pad out their articles with and the obvious choice is tributes from well known people in relevant sectors. The Daily Mail for example includes comments from 22 people in the worlds of IT, politics and the media. All 22 of those people are male. That's pretty sad. Later on they list a couple of twitter comments from Kylie Minogue and Tyra Banks but it's sad to think that women are so hugely under-represented in these areas in the 21st century.

Short open letter to Teresa May

2011-10-04T01:34:00.004+01:00

Dear Home Secretary

"Human rights" is a funny old expression isn't it? I mean it makes it sound like people are actually entitled to these things. And weirder still it makes it sound like all humans might be entitled to them - even the brown ones, and the lesbians and Olly Murs.

Now when I hear you want to deny people their human rights my blood is already starting to boil. But I want to hear you out, to understand your point. I don't really believe that human rights legislation nowadays means mass murderers are entitled to champagne cocktails. But maybe you picked up a copy of the Daily Mail on a train and some of the lies sank in by osmosis and you're too busy to check them.

However even you must be able to see what's wrong with this sentence from you as reported on Sky News:

"I'd personally like to see the Human Rights Act go because I think we have some problems with it, I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, the sort of problems we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects."

Now those who've been convicted of "terror" (presumably this includes people who stand up in cable cars ... if not it should!) can be locked up. Those who are only suspected of terror however - surely you do realise that they could be innocent. In fact so far in the UK the vast majority of terror suspects have turned out to be innocent.

So you're advocating deporting the innocent? That seems just a little bit mean. Actually it seems criminal and evil - terrible in fact. And you've clearly stated that that is your position so I suspect YOU of plotting an act of terror. The act of deporting people for the sole crime of being pointed at by a neighbour or corrupt police official.

This makes you a terror suspect. And you believe in deporting terror suspects. So...

Get out.

Thanks very much.

Tip Top Sex Advice for Ladies

2011-10-01T23:28:00.001+01:00

Need relationship advice? Where better to look for it than the Daily Male? Oh hang on ... what's that you say ... everywhere? Tamara Cohen's piece in today's paper deserves a destructive line-by-line more than anything I've read in years... It's catchily called "Boys' night out may be key to happy marriage as cutting ties with old friends could erode their masculinity"

Does anyone actually know what "erode their masculinity" means? Does the penis actually shrink? Or do they suddenly shudderingly come "to" and exclaim "My God! Are those my dirty pants on the floor? I'm so terribly sorry, I'll just go and stick them in the washing machine!"

"You book the theatre tickets, organise dinner with friends and remind him to have his hair cut this weekend."

Oh my mistake, I thought this was a relationship piece - evidently it's about caring for people in sheltered accommodation.

"But new research shows busybody wives to try to micro-manage their husband’s social lives may be storing up problems."

Hold on - if I buy the theatre tickets and organise the dinner - the response needs to be "thank you so much, I really appreciate you taking that stuff on".

"US scientists found men who do not have enough spare time to spend with their own friends, can feel less attracted to their partner."

Thanks for the detailed and specific information: US scientists. I know them. Jim and Sandra right? How much spare time is "enough"? Am I supposed to ring his boss and cancel his overtime? Who gave me this power? And who the fuck are his "own friends"? Am I not allowed to make eye contact with these people? And sure some people "can" feel less attracted and some "can" feel more attracted and some "can" wonder who the hell wrote this research and whether we should really be referring to them as a "scientist".

"They say wives who have steadily cut the ties with their husband’s old friends in favour of having dinner parties with other couples can erode men’s feelings of masculinity and lead to conflict within the relationship."

Really ladies if you want to "erode" your man's masculinity a simple point-laugh-"Oh my God, it's tiny" will suffice. Less washing up.

"The authors said there is nothing wrong with the wife doing most of the organizing of their social activities – as women tend to be more organized."

Of course there's something wrong with the wife having to do most of the organising. What's wrong is THE WIFE HAS DO MOST OF THE ORGANISING. That's what's commonly known as NOT FAIR. And really? Women just "are" more organised or women just are more likely to have a load of unpaid administrative work dumped on their lap while men watch Match of the Day? Aren't you scientists? Do you want to give us a reference for the biological predisposition of women towards social scheduling work?

"But they said reducing his contact with his friends to the point that all your socialising is done together can be dangerous."

Dangerous like shark attack dangerous? Anyway don't men love a bit of "dangerous" in the bedroom?

"It suggests wives should encourage their husbands to spend time alone with male friends – even the ones they don’t like."

Seriously? I'm now expected to try and talk my husband into going out drinking with blokes he doesn't like. How the hell is that going to help anyone?

"Professor Benjamin Cornwell, of Cornell University added: ‘There is a bit of a gate-keeper aspect that probably troubles some men."

Oh not Jim and Sandra then... Here's his CV - he's written eight papers which have been published in such illustrious journals as Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses and "has appeared live on Chicago Tonight". And men, listen, if you're unhappy about your wife's gate-keeping, why not keep your own gate?

"‘They key issue is whether it reduces his contact with his friends while it increases hers – for example she alters his social schedule to the point that his contact with his friends increasingly occurs in the context of couple’s dinners."

Ewww couple's dinners! Keys in the middle eh? Next thing you know someone comes round to read the meter, there's a terrible misunderstanding, ends up with vol-au-vents everywhere! Seriously couple's dinners are ace if YOU LIKE THE OTHER PEOPLE and shit if YOU DON'T. Thats all there is to it. Couples are people too you know?

"‘A man’s ability to play a round of golf or to have a few drinks with a friend who has only a passing acquaintance to his wife or girlfriend is crucial to preserving some independence in everyday life."

Well a man's ability to pick up a fucking telephone should probably kick in then. And is this actually science? Spending time away from someone preserves your independence from that person? Really? And if you wanted independence, why are you in a relationship where your wife tells you when to get a haircut?

"‘If he has to bring his wife along every time they meet, or his wife starts monopolising that friend, that’s when problems may arise.’"

So it's normal and healthy to not want to introduce your wife to your friends or to hope they don't get along? The words "not even slightly" spring to mind here.

"The researchers analysed data from the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project, a 2005 survey of 3,000 people in Chicago, who were aged 57 to 85."

Data from 6 years ago. And from then until now no-one noticed.

"They found the risk of erectile dysfunction was almost doubled in the group whose wives had the most contact with the couple’s shared friends, even allowing for related health conditions in this age group such as diabetes, heart problems and obesity."

Oh so this "eroding their masculinity" does mean "droopy cock"! Ha ha ha. And - look out "scientists" here's a quick newsflash: so you adjusted for diabetes, heart problems and obesity ... did you adjust for the fact that if you're senile enough that someone else has to remind you to get a haircut, erectile dysfunction is nature's way of telling you not to get it out in the grocery aisle.

"Men in their 50s and 60s were at the highest risk of this, suggesting the older men in the study had different priorities for socialising."

Yeah it's mostly group sex over 80 isn't it?* Maybe what these numbers were suggesting is that you were jumping to ridiculous conclusions based on a relatively small sample size of out of date data about highly subjective questions and a big ol' dose of wishful thinking. Just saying.

"Around 25 per cent of the men surveyed experiences ‘partner betweenness’ – when their partner becomes as close to one of their confidants as they are, in at least one of their relationships with a friend."

If your partner hasn't become really close to at least some of your friends - here's the skinny - you're not actually in a relationship. Or if you are it's going to end any time they take away your broadband.

"Prof Cornwell added: ‘We were surprised at how powerful the effect was – the equivalent of having prostate problems. For these younger men, partner betweenness more than doubled the risk.’"

Really? If I was you I'd be surprised how easy it is to plant a suspiciously poorly researched story into the mainstream press just cos it has the word "erection" in it and a deeply misogynist overtone.

"Co-author Edward Laumann, a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago said: ‘He needs to have someone to talk to about the things that matter to him – whether its football, politics, what car he is going to buy or worries about his health or his job."

But first he needs a haircut, right? Can he not tell his wife these things? She's probably too busy embroidering doilies for the next couple's night.

"‘The important thing is that he can let it all hang out and know that what he says isn’t going to get straight back to his wife.’"

I'll have to say I can back them up on this point - my man hates it when I find out what he thinks about football. It makes his dick fall off.

"Last week research from six African countries revealed women who wear the trousers at home may pay for it in the bedroom."

Oooh new "research"! From new "scientists" right?

"They could find themselves waiting 100 times longer for passion than those who share household decisions – about shopping and the weekly budget – with their husbands, according to a study from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore."

They "could" yes or they "could not". Also the Daily Fail's editors "could" all be screwed up fuckwits with limp dicks. Just saying - they COULD. Now more info on this report is available online here and again our trustee "scientists" (a different lot this time) are missing one great big point. The report says women who make household decisions reported less sex. Yes, I understand. Maybe, just maybe, that's because those who make household decisions are MORE LIKELY to also make decisions about whether or not to have sex. Less marital rape? How awful. And THINK THINK THINK before you call yourselves scientists. The report covers the following six countries:

Ghana 16.6%

Malawi 38.4%

Mali 6.3%

Rwanda 26.1%

Uganda 17.9%

Zimbabwe 57.9%

Oh I added in some numbers there - did you notice? - those are the percentages of the population with access to contraception in those countries. Can anyone think of a reason why a woman without access to contraception might not want to have sex? Gosh it's just as well these scientists are super-smart eh? Hate to see them miss something really fucking obvious.

So in case you missed it lets just recap: Hey ladies, want more sex with the guy you have to remind to get a haircut? Why not arrange for him to out drinking with some people he hates? That should help.

Seriously. Mainstream paper. I guess they chose to cover this "story" instead of updating their coverage of the Wall Street protests or the dismantling of the NHS? Ho hum.

*If you found my blog by googling "group sex for the over 80s" I wish you all the luck and love in the world but you will find no helpful links here. I assume the relevant website is called "Greydar"! [bows, accepts rapturous applause, leaves]

Do you live in Hull?

2011-09-30T18:21:00.000+01:00

If so you should definitely come to this:

Research Seminar II

Wednesday 23^rd November, 2011, Meaux Room, Staff House, University of Hull

4.15pm-6pm. Refreshments provided. Free entry, all welcome.

Kate Smurthwaite: feminist comedienne and activist: “A powerhouse of observational wit” (The Spectator)

‘The British media: should we just burn it down?’

"Fifty years ago women were considered outrageous if they appeared in the media in a bikini and only men presented motoring shows. Now a woman in the media is considered lucky if it's only her cleavage - not her labia - on display and ... erm ... it's still only men who get to present motoring shows. TV, radio and UK comedy circuit regular Kate Smurthwaite will talk about the state of the media and her own experiences and call for immediate radical action. Bring battering rams and grappling hooks! The revolution starts here and we will televise it ourselves."

Kate Smurthwaite is a well known feminist activist and campaigner. She is the vice-chair of Abortion Rights UK, an active member of London Feminist Network and the Secular Society and a regular contributor to The F Word Blog. Kate is also a highly regarded British comedienne, having performed more than 2,000 shows including the Bloomsbury Theatre, Soho Comedy Club, Comedy Cafe, Edinburgh Festival, and the New York and Malmo Comedy Festivals. She is currently resident compere at the Soho Comedy Club and the host and writer of London’s most popular live political panel show The Comedy Manifesto. She is also a seasoned broadcaster, contributing to television and radio programmes including BBC Television and BBC Radio 4 and 5 and has hosted shows on a range of UK independent radio stations.

MY Home Town!

2011-09-26T21:04:00.003+01:00

[trigger warning] I was born in London and I'm not one for pointless displays of patriotism, but I like London, I like living here and being from here. I was pretty horrified by this video from the BBC though. It's about an exhibition of tattoo art going on. Fair enough. But look at the guy 1m10 in... He describes his London-theme tattoo as featuring "Sherlock Holmes, dead prostitutes and Big Ben". Holy fuck. When did "dead prostitutes" become an ok thing to casually have tattooed on your arm under the heading "London theme"? And the interviewer doesn't stop him or question him. He allows him to carry on talking and describe himself as "an English gentleman". Lets remember lads, all together: real gentlemen don't trivialise the murder of prostituted women. Did that really need saying?

Memorandum to journalists about social media

2011-09-21T00:41:00.004+01:00

Hello all. Sorry for the round-robin message, I know it's only a small number of you who are letting the others down but I really think I need to have a word here.

It's about social media. Yes Twitter, Facebook and blogs are exciting new platforms for communication and sharing of information. We can certainly look at them and see what subjects people are discussing. However what we can't do is this: Take one or two specific quotes from members of the public on Twitter, Facebook or a blog and act like that's the nation's opinion.

Let me show you what I mean.

Example 1: An article about Adam Ramsay in the Daily Mail.

"Last night, several messages were posted under Ramsay’s blog by readers mocking his background. One of them pretended to be his mother, writing: ‘Adam darling, We’ve got no caviar left and the staff have taken the day orf... please be a dear and pick some beluga up when you and your Uni chums pop into Fortnums... Mwah, mwah, Mumsy.’"

Stop press! SEVERAL messages? Really so lets say "at least three". Clearly what Ramsay was doing (he was alleged to have been something to do with UK Uncut) was attracting a lot of attention. Lets assume 20,000 people heard of him and his blog. And lets assume five of them wrote something "mocking his background" (I did have a look at the time, that's about right). That would be one in 4,000 people. I'm pretty sure that one in 4,000 people in this country has written to Points of View because they're "morally outraged" by Blue Peter. And at least two in 4,000 go to the pub and try to convince their friends that Elvis is alive and works in Lidl. It's not a measure of national opinion, it's a measure of the random opinions of a tiny handful of people. It hugely smacks of "I've run out of arguments to support my stupid point" and also rather of "I know I'll get my teenage nephew to write something on Twitter and then quote him in the national press".

Example 2: The Sun chucking its toys out of the pram on the proposed Lib Dem Page 3 ban.

"The ploy sparked a wave of fury on Twitter, with one user saying: 'A country full of problems and in desperate need of solutions, and the Lib Dems are voting on banning Page 3. Sheesh!'"

They have exactly one example of this "wave of fury" and it's not even from someone who says they disagree with the measure - its from someone who thinks it shouldn't be a priority. And where is this "wave" really? Twitter uses hashtags (where you write the theme of a comment in the form #Page3 so people can search for it) to allow you to see who else out of their 100 million global users is talking about a particular subject. At noon today I was interviewed on the subject by Wendy Austin from BBC Ulster. She put a post up on Twitter asking people to contact her show with their opinions. That was 14 hours ago and there have been 10 comments about #Page3 since - none of them really expressing "fury". So that's less than one comment per hour from 100 million users! The fairer news story would be to say "there wasn't much reaction on Twitter, most people were still talking about Ashton Kutcher".

Quoting Twitter, Facebook, blogs and social media on news stories is stupid and lazy. It's fair enough to quote a person who is directly linked to the news story. And it's fair enough to discuss overall trends, what were the top subjects discussed or the results of a fairly-conducted, large sample size survey. It's even, arguably, fair enough to publish a selection of responses to a particular issue from social networking sites.

But to quote "a Twitter user" or "a person who made a blog comment" is as ridiculous as saying "a man on the 24 bus said he thought the war in Iraq was a good idea" and "a woman in a blue cardigan in York agreed". It's not news, its propaganda. Stop it.

Thanks very much for your time. All carry on now.

Ultimate Daily Fail line-by-line

2011-09-19T21:42:00.003+01:00

Who would have guessed the Daily Mail would have leapt on the bandwagon of a new film to let women know they need to stop trying to have careers? Yup, me too. Here it is: Women CAN’T have it all: Two thirds of working mums would have to quit their jobs if they couldn’t rely on help from family and friends. Right, but as long as friends and family are happy to help, they won't have to quit their jobs, so then they can "have it all". Right?

And here's the line-by-line...

"In I Don't Know How She Does It, Sarah Jessica Parker just about manages to juggle a job in a financial market firm with being the mother of two children. But she does it with a lot of help from a nanny."

Oh gosh, already I'm angry. Why does she "juggle" a job and kids? Doesn't juggle imply at any moment something's going to get dropped? Couldn't she just HAVE a job and kids? Or even "be busy with" a job and kids? Know any men who "juggle" tax accountancy with golf and a drink problem? Me either.

"Many modern working mothers can't afford personal childcare, though."

Right we should discuss three issues here shouldn't we?

1. Why do we still assume the mother is responsible for the childcare?

2. Why isn't the government doing something to tackle the cost of childcare?

3. Why is women's pay still lagging a long way behind men's and what can be done generally to increase wages?

"Instead they rely heavily on a close-knit circle of up to ten close friends and family to juggle their busy lives."

Juggle! Juggle! Juggle! Stop it already! But yes of course every child benefits from relationships with a range of adults.

"Mums call on their support network, dubbed 'Team Mum', to help out for around ten hours a week as they try to fit everything around their office hours, a survey found."

Ten hours a week is not that much really to have your child minded by others. It's less than two hours a day.

"Their own mothers are the first port of call in emergencies, while friends, neighbours and other children's mums are also likely to be on hand when needed."

Do these kids have fathers? Or has the Daily Mail uncovered human cloning?

"The study, carried out by Tesco Baby, found that 67 per cent of mothers believe they would have to give up work if they didn't receive help from Team Mum."

Why are these people called "Team Mum"? They're actually helping the kids. Just like Mum is.

"Having a close support network saves the average mum £140 a month in childcare costs. That adds up to a saving of £1,680 per year."

Only if we start from the assumption that the mother has to pay personally for 100% of the child-raising costs. What about the value of the child-rising these mothers do?

"The trend was revealed in a study carried out among 2,000 mums by Tesco to launch its 'Help a Mum' campaign."

Yeah the solution is not government action or societal attitude shifts, it's definitely for a major supermarket to launch a "campaign". If Tesco wants to help working mothers why not have creches in every store and sell real high quality food?

"Spokeswoman Lorna Dickinson said: 'Mums work incredibly hard and it's only natural that they rely on other people to help them out."

They rely on other people? Does anybody think that the rest of the world maybe relies a bit heavily on mums? Like to do 95% of the child-rearing for us?

"'Juggling work, meal times, housework and various appointments can be difficult so having a trusted network of reliable people can make a difference.'"

Jugglers work at the circus. But let it be known that Tesco thinks it is women who are responsible for housework...

"The study found mums typically enjoy ten hours of support from their network of friends and family, but one in 20 women has 31 hours of help every week."

Mums ENJOY ten hours of support? No mums enjoy back rubs and meals in nice restaurants. The real issue is mums only get ten hours a week of support. Where the hell are dads?

"Two thirds those who took part in the poll said their own mother was the one person they could not do without, and one third of women said their mother babysits their kids while they are at work."

Where were the questions about the support by the child's father? Where is the corresponding survey asking how tough it can be for working dads?

"Tesco's survey also revealed one in ten relies on their mother-in law's child-minding skills while five per cent get granddad to muck in."

How can these women have mother-in-laws? They don't know any men! Except - we learn - granddad!

"The findings come after Grannynet (a website for 'grannies in the know who are looking after their grandchildren') strayed into helping with childcare."

That sentence doesn't make sense. Not that that makes it look out of place in the Daily Male.

"Midwife Sally Underdown is running classes for members of the website which support the nation’s 7million grandmothers."

I'm not sure all of these 7 million women are using the site.

"Underdown teaches nans about how childcare has changed since they first had children."

Sadly it appears what hasn't changed is the notion that women bear 100% of the responsibility!

"Tesco's study found 40 per cent of mothers said they were part of a mum's network, with most belonging to two support teams."

Stop press! Parents get to know other parents and childminders...

"Around 58 per cent said no one in their support team accepted cash for their efforts."

That's why it's a support team - not an agency.

"But half of the participants said they returned the favour by babysitting for their friends when needed."

Is this news? Really?

"A third of mums said it was far easier to juggle everything when you are a stay-at-home mum as opposed to being a working mother."

I sure hope the other two thirds said "fuck off with your stupid survey, I don't juggle anything".

"And 27 per cent said it was 'impossible' to do everything yourself unless they were 'incredibly organised'."

And what percentage said they felt they ought to do everything themselves? I'm guessing about the same percent as the percentage that take shit they read in the Daily Mail seriously.

"Pippa Wright, mother-of-two and blogger at A Mothers Ramblings said: 'It is incredibly hard for mums working full-time during pregnancy but there are online pregnancy forums if mums are too busy to attend pre-natal classes."

Good. Hopefully these forums will have links to the Employment Tribunal service in case your company discriminates against you or fires you for being pregnant or taking maternity leave. This is amazingly common despite being completely illegal. We should be talking about this.

"'From these forums, I met almost 30 mothers who, after almost eight years, are friends I still rely on for advice."

Woman makes friends with other women in similar circumstance. Stop press. No really.

"'The smallest thing - like a rash - can be panic-inducing for a mum so being able to know another mum has been through the same issue and will respond is a massive weight off your shoulders."

If only there were another parent with whom the mum could share her fears and discuss them. Ah well - I guess one day Daily Mail readers will evolve from asexual to sexual reproduction...

"'Several friends have had to move back closer to their family in order to get help during and after their pregnancies."

Yes childcare is too expensive, women's wages (and wages in general) are too low. I blame the government.

"'Becoming and being a mother can be a difficult journey but as this research highlights, support is always available and mothers and friends should never be afraid to ask for it.'"

But don't ask the father. Just get his dinner ready on the table and practice giving good blowjobs right?

"The study also found a third of women said the hardest aspect of parenting was being a good mother whilst also being dedicated in the workplace."

Hmm - what percentage of fathers worry about being a good father? I'm saying less. So really the problem is living up to unreasonable gender-based expectations.

"But the same proportion said the hardest part of parenthood was keeping the house clean."

And the final third said the hardest part of parenthood was choosing outfits that made the whole family look like The Waltons.

"Nearly three quarters of mums said it would make their life simpler if they had more close family and friends helping them out with day to day errands."

Their own fault for "being afraid to ask for help" I imagine.

"Lorna Dickinson added: 'It's fantastic that mums help other mums out - from babysitting to giving advice and sharing parenting concerns."

Parenting concerns? Like where's that dude who knocked me up?!?

"'Being able to take the weight off their shoulders and having people to turn to is precious and our Help a Mum campaign is all about celebrating mums who help other mums.'"

Not all about getting your brand name in the papers without the inconvenience of paying for an actual advert then?

What's really amazing here is that we have an 800-word article about the difficulties faced by working mothers that NEVER ONCE so much as even mentions the idea that fathers can take responsibility for their children or contribute to their care.

Anytime I write something about the pay gap or the rape conviction rate I get a bunch of angry "MRAs" (so-called men's rights activists) telling me that actually it's men who are discriminated against because they don't get access to their children (like y'know, just cos they've got a couple of domestic violence convictions or something...). Well you want to be considered fully equal co-parents and given assumed shared custody in the family law courts? Maybe you'd like to start by campaigning against this attitude in one of the nation's most-read papers? Get back to me when you've finished and we'll talk.

Infuriating BBC!

2011-09-13T21:02:00.002+01:00

Argh! Who allows this sort of thing to go out on air? A woman - Marine Debray - appeared on University Challenge and subsequently received stacks of awful comments and messages on the Internet. The BBC frame it as "is it harder for a woman to be smart?" which is not really the point. It's not her intelligence that made her a target - it's her gender. Women on the Internet - and in real life - get harassed for being ugly, for being attractive, for being smart, for being dumb, for being tall, for being short, for being cheerful, for being angry, etc, etc. Indeed some of the hassle this woman got was from people saying she wasn't smart enough to be on University Challenge - so essentially hassling her for being dumb even though she very obviously isn't.

But then they get their resident "expert" on. I haven't managed to figure out who she is, but she's awful. They ask for her response and she (1) describes the harassment as unsurprising. Well true but that doesn't make it ok and (2) suggests it is the responsibility of Debray herself to "come across" in a way that deters harassment. NO! The responsibility for this lies with the people who posted the abuse. Not the victim. STOP IT! Get the victim-blamers off my screens! And then the BBC turn round and effectively ask Debray to respond to the suggestion that it's all her own fault!

The truth is we should be congratulating Debray on having the gumption to stand up and admit it happens and it's horrid and for drawing attention to the wider issue of sexist abuse on the Internet. Something can be done about it as demonstrated by the jailing of Facebook troll Sean Duffy.

I'll be on BBC Radio Five Live around 11.15pm tonight talking about whether children make our lives complete...!?

Dorries, Lies, etc

2011-09-01T14:07:00.002+01:00

I had a piece published in the Huffington Post yesterday about abortion access and Nadine Dorries. Seems like since then there is some good news. But we're not in the clear yet. Please if you haven't written to your MP about this - do so today! It's a two-click process here and you can join Abortion Rights while you're there and support our ongoing work trying to stop women's rights being eroded.

Escaping the Asylum

2011-08-14T18:40:00.003+01:00

Some of the awesome women who I teach English to with WAST (Women Asylum Seekers Together, a part of Women for Refugee Women) have a photography exhibition, which I've seen - it's incredibly powerful and moving. You can read about it and how to see it in The Observer here.

Still not sure if the criminal justice system is institutionally racist and sexist?

2011-08-13T14:25:00.002+01:00

This is one of the most heart-breaking things I've read in a long time. Makes me feel very petty for worrying about silly stuff like reviews.

Express Cru

2011-08-09T15:03:00.002+01:00

I'm quoted in today's Daily Express espousing the radical notion that women don't like having their arses randomly grabbed by men!

Edinburgh 2011

2011-08-08T14:55:00.002+01:00

Hello readers - so I'm up and running again at the 2011 Edinburgh Fringe. All the info on my shows and what I'm up to Fringe wise will be over at my News At Kate blog here. Please follow that blog if you're coming up to the Fringe or suggest it to friends who might be interested. Thanks.

Pro-choice Pod

2011-07-31T20:25:00.002+01:00

I was interviewed for a podcast at the pro-choice demo a couple of weeks ago. You can listen in here.

Do what I say!

2011-07-28T17:55:00.002+01:00

Just a short post but one everyone ought to read for your own safety. So Saturday night I'm coming home from my gig. The bus screeches to a halt - there's been a road traffic accident. A man is lying unconscious in the road in a pool of blood. Various bystanders are trying to help.

Now partly because I was a good girl guide and partly because I have witnessed several similar accidents I know what to do. So I get off the bus and since it's a long straight road and the traffic has stopped in both directions and an ambulance been called I say "Don't move him - he might have a spinal injury - don't move him, don't touch him". Now I am not lacking in a clear audible tone of voice - really - everyone hears me and everyone knows I'm serious.

Immediately a big bloke jumps in and starts moving the guy around. I shout at him to stop, that it's not safe to move him around. He replies "It's alright, love, I know him". Ah yes, the well known spinal injury preventing force field of previous acquaintance... Amazing it's not discussed in medical text books more. I explain again. "I hear you love, I hear ya" he says before grabbing the guy's head and lifting him up six inches by it. Yes he lifted the unconscious bleeding guy up by his head. "What are you doing?" I ask. "Chill out love, I'm not going to move him, I'm just putting a jacket under his head as a pillow" is the angry response.

It would be one thing if the big bloke had asked me to explain further or explained what he thought was a good idea. I would have been all up for explaining my point or asking the 999-ambulance operator for advice. But no, he heard me loud and clear and decided to just wade in and do what he (on the basis of clearly no medical knowledge whatsoever) thought was a good idea. Well if his friend never walks again all I can say is: blame the patriarchy.

Spot the Culturally Insensitive Difference

2011-07-26T21:54:00.003+01:00

So here's the Daily Star's shock horror exposé claiming Ryan Giggs had a "kinky frolic" (I think that means "dance") with a belly dancer:

And here's what an actual belly dancer looks like:

I know lots of women who enjoy belly dancing classes and none of them would describe it as being about "kinky frolics". They do it to keep fit, to feel good about themselves, to maintain a link with their cultural past and a few, occasionally, to entertain - on a stage or in a performance space, in front of a well-behaved mixed or all-female crowd. If there is any audience participation it is usually getting people to join the dance imitating the professional - as a sort of teach-in. Oi tabloids, get your grubby sensationalising hands off of our art forms!

Hello America

2011-07-17T16:52:00.002+01:00

It appears your news networks think they can feed you any old lies...

...now in case it's not clear (and it's REALLY not) the Pentagon and Citibank were hacked. People effectively broke into their computer systems and downloaded information. A discussion about whether finding out about dodgy corrupt goings on justifies the means used to get hold of the info and whether the info is ending up in the right hands might be interesting to have, but it's not the point. The point is that the News of the World organisation was a hacker - not a victim of hacking, a PERPETRATOR of hacking. Their journalists didn't hack government offices or large banks - they broke into privately owned mobile phones including those of murderer children and dead Iraq war veterans. Yes they broke into dead children's phones and dead soldier's phones. Seems like Fox News has forgotten to mention this in their coverage.

Woman of the Week

2011-06-16T00:40:00.003+01:00

I only just found out I won something! Apparently back in April I was Platform 51's Woman of the Week. They also describe me as "absolutely hilarious" and an "amazing supporter" of their work! The week before they gave it to Susan B Anthony so I'm in pretty good company! Thanks.

I'm in the Daily Fail today quoted on rape and whether we are all asking for it by not covering our ankles. If that's to uncomfortable to click on there is a similar set of quotes from me in a similar piece in the Daily India.

And I was on BBC Ulster, TalkSport and BBC Five Live today talking about whether chivalry can be sexist. You can listen again I expect to the Five Live version, its at 11.20pm on the Tony Livesey show - they usually leave them up for a week.

Cameron's brain-dead perspective

2011-06-13T00:35:00.003+01:00

According to a joyfully-written piece in the Daily Mail David Cameron is taking steps to reduce benefits to families with large numbers of children. But he doesn't seem to have twigged that as he punishes those irresponsible parents who have dared to reproduce without thoughtfully going to Eton first, he seems to forget that he's also punishing all eight of their children - eight children who have done nothing wrong and now can't afford to eat. How is it fair to punish those children for their parents being out of a job while Cameron does nothing to improve their economic prospects. Makes me so angry!

In all of his expensive education - did he never read Voltaire's Candide: "Dieu a puni ce fripon, le diable a noyé les autres.". Or indeed "Economics for Dummies"!.

Instant Karma!

2011-06-08T15:10:00.002+01:00

Feel good about yourself right now, in your seat/pyjamas/office (delete as applicable, maybe all three). Mr Cru and I are running a 10k in aid of an ace charity that supports women in war-torn Congo (DRC). And you can sponsor me right here right now on this page! Think how good you'll feel when you've done it! And much much appreciated by me.

Smurthwaite vs The World

2011-05-29T22:17:00.003+01:00

...which frankly I think is what The Big Questions should be renamed when I'm on it! Anyway I was on it this morning and you can watch it for the next week on iPlayer here.

Save Poppy Fundraiser tonight!

2011-05-25T03:25:00.002+01:00

If you are London-based then please please please come to this awesome fundraiser tonight!

The event: all-female cabaret show featuring former nationwide "Funny Women" winner Debra-Jane Appelby, cabaret star Bunny Morethan, singer/singwriter Becky Rose, plus character comedy from Susan Harrison as Mina the Horse and Aussie star comedienne Celia Pacquola and hosted by feminist comedienne Kate Smurthwaite. Tickets £15 regular, £12 concessions. At The Comedy Pub, 7 Oxenden Street near Picadilly Circus. Doors 8pm, show 8.30pm. [footnote, venue is 18+ and not wheelchair accessible though we will try to help if we can in any way!]

The cause: The Poppy Project is the only dedicated organisation in the UK helping victims of trafficking for sexual purposes. They just lost ALL their government funding which is instead being given to homophobic, anti-choice, fundamentalist Christian organisation The Salvation Army. It's an almighty mess. We urgently need to sort it out!

How to book: go on to the just giving page and make a donation equivalent to (or more than!) the ticket price you want. Either put your name(s) in the "encouragement" box or send us an email telling us your Just Giving username and what tickets you want (you can email me here: smurfjapan@yahoo.com). We're doing it this way to avoid paying the 9% fee most ticket-sales websites take. But don't worry you really will be on the guest list!!

There might in theory be a few tickets left on the door but please book now if you want to come to make sure you get a ticket and so we know you're coming!

Not paranoid enough about your body?

2011-05-25T01:58:00.003+01:00

Angela Epstein* can help. Apparently Cheryl Cole has fat ankles. Yes grab your sick bag (you may also need a magnifying glass to actually spot the "problem"), it's going to get gross. It's going to get gross line-by-line:

"Cheryl Cole and I have never had a great deal in common."

Good point - one of you is a brain-dead vacuous pool of seething hatred towards their fellow humans and the other is Cheryl Cole.

"The X Factor judge is a global superstar with the kind of looks that can bring traffic to a standstill."

Lets not talk about the effect she has on toilet attendants eh?

"I’m a mother of three from Manchester who rarely attracts an admiring glance."

Especially not for your journalism.

"She earns millions of pounds a year; I earn peanuts. You get the picture."

Really? Why debase yourself writing this drivel if you're not well paid for it?

"But after seeing recent pictures of the Geordie singer in the U.S., I realised we share something: cankles."

If only the Daily Fail's website would allow the word to be printed up in tombstone-style lettering?

"The lovely Cheryl may have looked like the perfect pop princess in a perky little dress and sky-scraper heels, but there was no mistaking the unwanted accessory pooling round her feet."

Prepare to vomit. Ready?

Unless a "cankle" is a large amount of someone else's hair glued in to your own to help you make shampoo commercials I really cannot identify the problem here.

"In fact, when I saw the former Girls Aloud singer, I gasped aloud in sympathy."

Think back to ten seconds ago, when you looked at the picture? Did you gasp? No, me either.

"Forget her previous woes (being cuckolded by a philandering former husband or flattened by a dose of malaria), this was worse — much worse."

I'll take the cankles myself, you can keep the malaria, and Ashley Cole.

"And as a cankles sufferer, I should know."

Really to make a fair comparison you have to have also had malaria and been cheated on by a top level footballer.

"Cankles, for the uninitiated (oh lucky, lucky you!), occur when the calf meets the foot in one unapologetic union. It’s a fusion of calf and ankle."

If your calf is not fused to your ankle - seek medical help urgently.

"No elegantly turned, twiglet-thin ankle contours for Cheryl or me. Just one sausage-shaped lump of fat splodged at the bottom of your leg."

There's nothing wrong with Cheryl's legs, really. But even if she had this debilitating deformation, is it really her fault? Should she be pilloried for it?

"Think Hillary Clinton, Cherie Blair, Patsy Kensit and Mischa Barton."

I'm getting: politician, human rights lawyer (actually called Cherie Booth), actress and who the hell is the other one?

"Even the saintly Helen Mirren — who manages to looks stunning in a bikini even though she’s eligible for a bus pass — can’t escape the curse of the cankle."

Is it saintly to look good in a bikini? When did helping the poor and needy go out?

"And my heart just bleeds for her because, unlike any other physical defect — jowls, ugly teeth, a wonky nose, enormous breasts —there’s little you can do about cankles."

Now go outside and ask the first straight guy you see whether enormous breasts are a physical defect? Frankly I tend to find when a gal gets her enormous breasts out everyone stops looking at her wonky nose.

"There is no ointment that can shrink your bones — nor can improving your diet or pounding the gym treadmill really help shrink your ankles in the way they can banish a tummy bulge."

Amputation? Or here's a radical solution, stop worrying about your ankles and focus on world peace.

"As a size ten, I can tell you from painful personal experience that cankles bear little relation to your weight or fitness."

Painful? Really I feel sorry for anyone who pushed themselves to the point of pain because they believed there was something wrong with their size ten ankles.

"After all, Cheryl’s slight frame would suggest she’d be the last person on the planet to exhibit the kind of lower legs usually found on a swollen matriarch down the local bingo hall."

Eww - a "matriarch" - literally a female head of a family - they're the gross ones right?

"In fact — and I try not to seethe with the unfairness of this — I once worked with someone who was as round and bouncy as a TV agony aunt (she even kept a scrunched-up hankie in her hand to complete the look), but come summer, she’d unpeel woolly tights to reveal the daintiest little ankles I’d ever seen."

So she was jealous of you being a size ten and you were jealous of her thin ankles. How the long winter nights must have flown by!

"It didn’t matter how many times a day I’d catch her face-down in a smoked salmon and cream cheese bagel. The ankles never put on a pound."

I consider smoked salmon and cream cheese bagels a healthy lunch option. But perhaps you could tell your friend to try lifting it to her mouth, biting and chewing. It's quite hard to graze a stuffed bagel.

"No, the only option for the Cankle Crew is to try to hide the damned things."

Or the stop-worrying-and-be-proud-of-the-important-things-that-make-you-great option. Especially if, like Cheryl's, it's a figment of your imagination.

"That is why I’ve spent my life constructing a wardrobe that means my shapeless ankles are out of sight: think thick black tights, loose-fitting trousers and no short, flirty skirts."

Spent a lifetime? Oh well you probably wouldn't have come up with a cure for cancer anyway.

"I dread the summer because that’s the time cankles are almost impossible to conceal — I thank God every sunny day for the maxi-dress: the ultimate in cankle camouflage."

By the way if you're going to play that game - God also gave you the cankles. Or you just evolved that way - though "evolved" seems a little kind for someone who writes rubbish like this.

"Selecting the right footwear is as critical as your clothes. Forget gladiator sandals or dainty ballet pumps. Flat shoes only serve to accentuate fat ankles."

They also serve to make it a heck of a lot easier to get around without developing a massive painful bunion.

"Instead, I live in long, slim-fitting, high-heeled boots — the column of black providing a cankle-disguising optical illusion. I keep these on even when the thermometer nudges 70 degrees."

That must be fun for you. I wear jelly shoes and flip flops and though no doubt this makes my ankles look disgusting at least my face isn't wrinkled up in agony.

"When I do buy high heels, I always select ones with an ankle strap or one across the foot to distract from the flesh beneath."

Why buy high heels when you "live" in boots? Unless, could it be? Is it possible? The Daily Mail has printed a LIE?!!

"I have a favoured pair of black stilettos with heels like a giraffe’s neck and a strap that garottes the skin and leaves a pink welt."

Why not accessorise the pink welt with a matching clutch bag? Perhaps one filled with some sort of medicine that helps you make more rational decisions.

"At times my feet go blue though lack of circulation. But what choice do I have?"

Trainers? Crocs?

"It’s the nearest I can get to ankle corsetry, squeezing the damned things into a shape that Nature denied them."

Really - there are people out there with spina bifida and you're complaining Nature gave you fat ankles?

"Any other tips? Well, I’m told that toning the calves may help — perhaps going on long walks or cycling to shift those fat deposits around the lower leg.And go easy on the salt. Too much sodium can make certain parts of your body bulge, especially your ankles."

But only a few lines ago NOTHING could be done. Now I can switch to a low-sodium diet and go cycling?

"Sitting around for hours (me in front of a computer; Cheryl in front of the next Mariah Carey) can cause blood to pool round the feet and enhance the swelling."

I balance my desk time out by also spending time with my feet over my head, doing yoga or having headboard damaging sex...

"So it’s important to get up every 20 minutes or so to stretch your legs."

But remember NOTHING will work. How can I get up every 20 minutes when MY LIFE IS RUINED?

"If the only thing for it is the plastic surgeon’s knife, some clinics offer laser-assisted liposuction of the lower leg."

Yet another thing I CAN DO? It's like this whole article is just lies!

"An incision is made in the skin and light from the laser is absorbed by fat cells, liquefying them so they can be flushed out by the body."

Sadly surgery can only remove actual problems (tumours, diseased organs), not imaginary ones. Also you might get an infection or take too much anaesthetic and die. Obviously that would be better than having imaginary fat ankles.

"For the more squeamish, the internet is crammed with magic creams and potions promising to fight cankle fat."

OK so I checked - I googled "magic creams and potions for cankle fat". The first result is Ms Epstein's article. Above that it says "did you mean magic creams and potions for ankle fat?". Neither search offers any specific product for ankles and most links are discussing how there is no magic cream that can get rid of fat.

"Do any of these treatments work? I doubt it. As far as I can tell, our hideous little problem is incurable and one we will take to our graves."

"Incurable"? That would imply it's an illness wouldn't it? And look back at the picture of Cheryl and try to decide her ankles are "hideous". What a load of rubbish.

"So my best advice, Cheryl, pet, is simply to take heart from the fact that very few women have it all. If cankles are all you’ve got to worry about, consider yourself blessed."

As you mentioned earlier Angela - she also has malaria and a husband that sleeps around.

"But take it from me: a short skirt, bare legs and heels? I’m afraid it’s not your most flattering look, any more than it’s mine."

Remember women - you should only ever go around in YOUR MOST FLATTERING LOOK. Never the thing you want to wear, the thing that you feel good in, the thing that's comfortable and practical or (like me) the thing that passes the sniff test in the morning! And let me conclude by saying Angela that even from here you DEFINITELY do not pass the sniff test. If they pay you peanuts - it's too much. Stop writing pointless nasty articles and shopping for maxi-dresses and do something useful with your life!

*Angela and I did the Jeremy Vine show together once before, I forget what it was about but I do remember congratulating her on her sense of irony after she told me women like me were setting the cause of women's equality back decades. Ha ha ha.

In defence of Tracey Emin

2011-05-20T02:17:00.004+01:00

There is an article in the Evening Standard today (well yesterday now) by art critic Brian Sewell slating Tracey Emin's new retrospective. I haven't read such a great big pile of sexist nonsense in a long time. You can read it here but be sure to bandage your hands up first because you will want to hit something. I've written to them as follows:

I'm wondering whether to save column inches in future Brian Sewells comments on Tracey Emin could be replaced with the words "I'M A GREAT BIG MISOGYNIST"?

Nobody has to like Tracey Emin, her very open and very populist style of art will always attract it's critics. Sewell sets the scene early on however when he accuses her of "playing the drunken slut" apparently unaware that any woman who dares drink in public or admit to a sexual past is at risk of labelling in that insulting gendered way. For the record - it's ok for women to drink alcohol and have sex. Men do it all the time.

Apparently Sewell feels alienated by Emin's frank discussion of the abuse she suffered as a child and issues which have affected her personally like abortion and menopause. For comparison he says "I do not feel excluded from the distress of Madame Bovary or Madame Butterfly", failing to mention that both of those characters were created by men. The female characters in them are defined wholly, rather boringly, by the relationships they have with the men around them. Speaking as a woman I can say I never identified much with either of them.

He further claims that Gilbert and George beat Ms Emin to the mark in using the word "cunt" prominently in art, forgetting that neither Gilbert nor George has a cunt. Does the word "n****r" mean the same thing whether a black or a white person uses it? No, of course not. And so Emin's use of "cunt" has a significance quite different from Gilbert and George's work.

In arguing that being open about her female experience Emin is alienating her male audience seems to forget that the history of art for hundreds of years has been the history of art created by men and consumed by men. Women have at best been allowed to sit still, silent and naked while it is produced. We should be delighted that that era appears at last to be reaching it's end. If one percent of the art world is now by women and for women, the word for that is "progress".

And anyway she doesn't - Emin's work invites men and women to examine modern womanhood close up. A third of British women have had abortions and at least one in twenty been raped. Menopause affects us all. If Sewell isn't prepared to face up to that and discuss maturely the way that Emin and others discuss these realities through art, I can only suggest replacing him with an art critic who isn't a cunt.

My Twenty Minutes with Nadine Dorries

2011-05-17T22:10:00.004+01:00

I discover to my delight that the argument I had about abstinence only sex education with Nadine Dorries on the Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio Two is available as a special extract/highlight. I must warn you if you have an expensive computer monitor though, definitely don't take a big mouthful of coffee just as Ms Dorries is about to speak! Listen to it all here.

Rod Liddle and rape

2011-05-16T21:15:00.002+01:00

Had a chat with one Rod Liddle this morning on BBC Ulster about rape and (joy of joy) it IS available on listen again here. Starting 1h 16m in.

Godparents and other animals

2011-05-14T12:47:00.002+01:00

I don't always get round to blogging my radio appearances (sorry!) but I did a little spot on BBC 5 Live Breakfast show today about godparents. You can "listen again" here for the next seven days. My contribution starts just after 1h 55 mins into the show.

New Pseudo-Scientist

2011-04-28T11:49:00.003+01:00

Terrible article in this week's New Scientist about the royal wedding. The link is here but sadly you have to register which is a bit of a pain. Here, anyway, is my letter to them complaining about it:

I was intrigued when I saw [P36, Issue 2809] your coverage of the royal wedding and hoped to read something that explained the public and media excitement about a relationship between two people who most of us don't know at all. Sadly the article seemed to be distinctly lacking in science. Firstly author Geoffrey Miller claims "male brains will be sparked by Will's military titles", without offering any evidence of this. I happen to be married to a former military journalist but when I asked him what William's titles were he said "I dunno, something over the top that he doesn't deserve". He didn't even seem interested in finding out.

Then we are given the classic outdated theories about sex appeal. Will likes Kate because she's attractive (obviously) but also because of her sense of humour which indicates fertility. Speaking as a professional comedienne I can assure you than men who find my jokes funny are rarely overwhelmed by a pressing need to impregnate me. You might well argue however that it is pretty logical when committing to spending large amounts of time with someone to pick someone whose company you enjoy. Perhaps it's not evolutionary prerogative at work here but conscious common sense?

Then we hear about Kate's cunning in convincing William to marry her because of the benefits to her potential children. We seem to have forgotten that William's genes also stand to benefit from his commitment to the wellbeing of their children. The notion that men only make good fathers because women have lured and tricked them into doing so is an insult to the many great caring dads in Britain.

Of course the true agenda of the piece emerges about half way through. Apparently the media fail to give Kate the credit she deserves for bagging herself a future king. We are (allegedly) tripping over ourselves to praise Oprah, Meryl, Hillary and Nigella but not Kate. Has Miller bothered to open up a single page of the national press in the last three months? Articles praising Kate for every outfit she chooses, every comment she makes, every smile she throws at a waiting paparazzo take up page after page of coverage that could have been dedicated to a tsunami or human rights crisis. And the only coverage I can find of Nigella recently is a nasty article in the Daily Mail calling her fat (which surely ought to be a compliment for a chef, but clearly isn't intended as such).

And whose fault is this mythical lack of coverage of the royal bride-to-be's evolutionary man-bagging prowess? According to Miller - feminism. Yes those pesky equal rights campaigners. Can Miller give a single example of a feminist who has criticised Ms Middleton? Evidently not. I'll explain why: the pay gap in this country is wide and not closing, the latest round of government cuts are set to hurt women on an unprecedented scale, rape has a 6% conviction rate against reporting and two women a week are murdered in Britain by their male partners or ex-partners. We feminists have bigger fish to fry than attacking a (probably) lovely posh girl about to marry a (probably) lovely posh boy she met at college.

[I hope they publish it though probably they'll edit it down to the line "...feminism. Yes those pesky equal rights campaigners." and leave it at that!]

Late-term abortion privacy debate

2011-04-22T12:39:00.003+01:00

I had a very serious piece published today on The Guardian's CiF website. It's about the Information Tribunal's decision to release detailed breakdowns on late term abortions for medical reasons to the Pro-Life Alliance. [Yes, I can see the flaw in this plan too!] And extra extra special thanks to the women who were kind enough to let me interview them yesterday about their own experiences and feelings.

I'd advise NOT reading the comments if you want a calm stress-free afternoon. And if you want to comment on it here where I get to moderate the comments and won't be publishing* lies, derailments or other general hate mail, go ahead!

*Unsure about my comment policy? Think my refusal to publish your comment "probably a lesbian, has fat arms" might be infringing on your freedom of speech? Do read this.

Dear Cru - How Should I Vote on AV?

2011-04-18T23:11:00.003+01:00

A fan* writes: Does anyone else (like me) just not get how AV is supposed to be better than FPTP??? I have had it explained about the 50% of the votes bit, but how does ending up with someone who may have been many peoples 2nd or 3rd choice getting elected, become better? also it's hard enough with todays lot to even find a credible 1st choice! how the hell are we supposed to find another two???

OK listen carefully. The problem with politics is (I agree) that there are never any good candidates you really want to vote for. Why not? Well here's the trouble: imagine you have brilliant ideas and want to be a politician. You have two choices right? You could spend 20 years sucking up to one of the major parties even though you disagree with most of their policies and think their leaders are a bunch of corrupt dickheads. OR you could run as an independent or part of a smaller party (maybe your own, new, party) with a list of policies you actually want.

But here's the problem. Option one won't get your brilliant ideas into politics. It will just waste your life working for stuff you don't believe in.

But option two is worse. If you stand for election under the current system (FPTP or first past the post) you will simply split the vote for the party who is nearest to you. So lets say you're against student top-up fees. People now have to choose between you (no top-up fees), a "reduce the top-up fees" candidate, a "keep the fees the same" candidate" and an "increase the fees" candidate. So every vote you get is one less person voting "reduce the fees" or "keep the fees the same" and good news for the "increase the fees" candidate. In fact running as a candidate yourself significantly increases the likelihood that the ultimate winner will be someone who you completely disagree with.

However with AV your supporters can vote for you #1 and maybe that's enough to win and they can put "reduce the fees" #2, and "keep the fees the same" at #3. What they're saying is "if I can't have exactly what I want, I'd like the nearest thing available". Which should surely go without saying.

And importantly it means that new and independent candidates are encouraged to stand. Bringing more ideas into the system and giving us all more choice and more likelihood of finding a candidate we do believe in! And you can vote for them without "wasting" your vote. So you don't have to resort to "tactical voting" to keep hated parties out! You can actually vote for who you want to win and put your tactical choices as #2, #3,...

It's loads better than the current system. You should support it.

*not necessarily a fan of mine.

Some Snippets

2011-04-15T02:33:00.003+01:00

(1) The Whistleblower by Kathryn Bolkovac with Cari Lynn. You should buy and read this book. I was very kindly sent a review copy ages ago and read it in more or less a single sitting. Been meaning to write a proper review for ages but there isn't much to say apart from "HOLY CRAP, that's terrible, everyone should know about this, something should be done.". I hear there's a film coming. You should go see that too.

(2) I had a rather interesting, if somewhat after the event, email about the debate I did on Islam on The Big Questions the other month. The author (who claimed to be an Algerian muslim woman, but this being email I can't verify) says I am wrong to criticise Islam's treatment of women. In fact, I am assured, in 95% of life Islam treats men and women the same. And even if that's true that's still the problem isn't it? Cos 95% isn't the same as 100%. I do't want to be rated as the equal of a man in 95% of situations, I want full equality. I want to be regarded as as much of a human being as everybody else, men and women. Doh!

(3) Comedians - don't ever gig for a Daniel Lewis/Lasserman. Everyone else - don't ever go to a gig run by this rogue. In over 7 years in this industry I've only walked out of a gig once* - and it was last Friday at the Marble Hill Pub in Richmond at a "gig" organised by this Daniel Lewis/Lasserman**. It seemed dodgy from the outset - no contract, not much info, etc, but having said "yes" I figured I didn't want to let anyone down. I arrived to discover no separate comedy room, no mic, no lights and no other acts booked - all of which my manager had been assured there would be. Instead I was expected to perform in the corner of the pub within a few metres of family meals - children, dogs, etc. Not wanting to let people down I approached the "audience members" and explained this was going to be a weird gig but if they were happy to be friendly and have it as a "chatty" gig I would do my best for them. They responded by shouting abuse at me. So I left. As I was leaving one of them even grabbed me (yes, physically, while the landlord stood by and did nothing, luckily I was able to shove him off and shout at him til he backed off) and urged me to come back and "fight harder"! Ha ha ha, even the audience thought it was a "fight" rather than a "performance". I didn't think it needed saying but if you plan on running a comedy night, first you should probably go to a few and make some notes on how they work (and how they don't work)!! Now I have a lengthy angry phone message about how it was my job to "control" the audience*** and about how he's going to be running comedy nights in 200 pubs and he knows lots of top acts who will want to perform at them. But trust me top act or total newcomer - you definitely don't want to work for this douchebag. If by some freaky chance you were one of the audience members who wasn't shouting abuse (and I would recognise you, there were only about four such people) drop me a line and I'll be more than happy to guest list you for a real comedy show I'm performing at some time, plus you can enjoy the rare thrills of a mic, lights, other acts, no dogs, etc!

*I did once walk offstage many years ago at the Live Bar in Deptford after being physically threatened (with a lit cigarette, back when you could smoke indoors) by an audience member but the promoter and landlord swiftly removed this man from the premises and I agreed to go back on and finish my set.

**You can always trust a guy who needs to change his name from time to time!

***Presumably including the dogs, children and the drunk abuse-shouters.

But Daily Mail - who should I blame?

2011-04-07T01:28:00.005+01:00

Hey gals, are you up to your eyeballs in housework and caring responsibilities and no idea who to blame? Well fear not - the Daily Fail is here to help - check out this classic piece "Think your man doesn't pull his weight at home? Maybe it's YOUR fault". Really. Yes. That is actually the title of the piece. Needless to say while my dirty pots and pans just sit there, I'm doing a line-by-line...

"Today, women outperform men at school and university. They make a success of their early careers and enter into relationships on their own terms."

Wow who knew a two-person relationship could be established based on one person's "terms". Mine are half board, all bills and cunnilingus on a Wednesday afternoon, who's in?

"So why then, once children come along, do so many women end up ‘holding the baby’, to the detriment of everything else in their lives, while their partners’ lives seem to carry on as before — relatively free of childcare responsibilities?"

Well given that 94% of pregnant women say they return from maternity leave to a worse job role than the one they left, maybe it's because employers discriminate so much against pregnant women that many feel de-incentivised to put in so much effort on their return. Maybe it's because with a pathetic two weeks of paternity leave available men are overtly discouraged from bonding with their babies and learning how to care for them. Just throwing some ideas out there.

"Could women be their own worst enemies when it comes to the balance of modern family life?"

Yeah that'll be it. I probably built my own prison cell and climbed inside. No doubt in the 250 year history of the fight for women's rights all we really needed was one woman to go "oh stop it girls, you've only yourselves to blame" and we could all have been CEOs and Prime Ministers centuries ago.

"There is a photograph of me holding my son when he is two months old. He is in rude health. His complexion is peachy, his eyes shine with liveliness and curiosity. In contrast, I appear to be in the grip of a life-sapping disease. My skin is sallow and drawn, the grey offset only by aubergine accents below the eyes. My cheeks are hollow."

There's a reason for that - if you have a peachy complexion and are holding a sallow, drawn, grey and aubergine child, social services tend to pop round.

"A few months later, I appraise myself in the landing mirror on the return leg from a night feed. There has been no improvement: I still look deathly. My dressing gown is covered in an applique of baby snot and nappy cream. My T-shirt is stiff with stale breast milk. What has happened to me?"

You don't wear heels and mascara to breast-feed your baby in the night? Personally I pop on something from Stella McCartney's wipe-clean-nightwear-with-velcro-tit-flaps collection.

"I worried about being a parent long before I became one. I had a decent job behind the scenes in television that, though it didn’t make me rich or powerful, allowed me to think of myself as an independent, capable woman and gave me just enough cash and free time to live a varied and spontaneous existence."

Maybe you really were an independent capable woman. Maybe you deserved more than a decent job. Maybe you deserved the opportunity to become rich and powerful. Actually sorry, based on your journalism skills, scratch that. Clearly you got away with it for a few years.

"I fretted about the inevitable compromises to my life and relationship with my husband that having a child would bring. We wrestled with the issue off and on for a few years. Then, as I hurtled towards the wrong end of my 30s, like many couples we took the plunge and I hoped for the best."

Ooops, maybe you should have tried campaigning for equal maternity and paternity rights and more employer flexibility for parents rather than hoping for the best.

"The result has been both much better and worse than I’d imagined. I have discovered the intense joys of parenthood. But I have also learnt that the inequality mothers experience in raising their children is not simply the cause of occasional bouts of angst, but the foundation on which our existence is built and future prospects determined."

I agree mothers do experience inequality, as a society we need to do better.

"My husband and I may have bought all the baby equipment and read all the right books before our child was born, but I was still entirely unprepared for the fundamental undoing of the life and identity I’d carefully constructed for myself over the previous 15 years and, in particular, the demolition of the equality that I’d thought to be at the heart of my relationship with my husband."

Right again - big issue. The personal is political, etc, etc. It's all very well men claiming to be in favour of equal rights in the workplace, they need to step up to the plate in the home and actually pull their weight.

"We walked home from hospital a new family of three. My husband took his two weeks’ statutory paternity leave. We spent that fortnight in a jet-lagged haze, barely getting any sleep, but surviving on exhilaration and adoration for our child."

Yes paternity leave is a good thing. Two weeks isn't long enough. See: what all feminists have been saying since the dawn of time.

"But then my husband went back to work, our baby ceased sleeping all day and the music stopped."

Clearly you needed support.

"My devotion to my son was unshakeable, but I was now faced with day after day in which for 12 or more hours I was solely responsible for an infant who was entirely dependent on me, utterly resistant to being put down and never seemed to want to nap."

So your husband was working 12 hour days the week after returning from paternity leave and arranged no other support network/nanny/au pair/etc? Yes that is unreasonable.

"Abruptly, the severe challenges of motherhood were brought home to me. Having been used to environments where I mixed with women and men of all ages, circumstances and life stages, I now lived in a world where I only ever seemed to be in the company of other new mothers and their young charges."

Other mothers? Eww, they sound awful. I can't bear socialising without men there either.

"Collectively shell-shocked, our topics of conversation appeared limited to the merits of various pram models and how to tackle colic. I vacillated between a desperate hunger for tips on encouraging my child to sleep and a head-pounding boredom with this narrow baby-centric world."

And no doubt the other mothers felt this way too. Perhaps you could have talked about it, or would that have been breaking the sorority rules?

"Every day, I was pulled up sharp by the dismantling of my former life. En route to my mother-and-baby activities, I would pass young women heading off to work dressed immaculately and with the luxury of a solitary bus ride ahead of them. I was filled with envy."

Is there anything you want back from your working life apart from the outfits? Really, stick a frock and a bit of lippy on and stop it.

"I’d known that life with a newborn would be tough, but what made it hard to bear was the disparity that was emerging between my existence and that of my husband."

Yes inequality is infuriating isn't it? Welcome to feminism!

"Up and out of the house by eight in the morning, scrubbed and suited, I suspected that he was only too glad to flee the domestic disorder he left behind."

Was it a designer suit? A silk tie? If only your self esteem was built on something other than your dress sense we could talk about other ways of dealing with the issues here.

"In my thoughts, I jealously shadowed his day: a day in which he had time to himself, exercised his brain and kept his career on track. No wonder, then, that when he came through the front door in the evening as I was clearing up the baby’s wreckage, he was sometimes met with tears or sulking. Bound up in my enforced domesticity, I gave no thought to my husband’s own entrapment in the world of work."

So he was entrapped in work? Ok so time to talk about automatic flexible working for parents and more paternity leave? Clearly you need more help here. And if he's being greeted with tears and sulking and he's not responding by asking questions about post-natal depression and also what he can do right away to help he's a dick. He can start by clearing up that baby wreckage for you and sticking the kettle on. And when he's done a foot rub might be nice. Remember - it's should all be in the terms you set out when you met him.

"When a couple choose to have children, all the gains women have supposedly made over the past few decades seem to vanish, as the time machine of motherhood transports us back to the Fifties."

Yes and while the stupid "men's rights" campaigners want to legislate to allow absent fathers to dictate the behaviour of the mothers of their children, none of them has started a campaign to get men to take responsibility for the real hard work of childcare. Revolution needed!

"After my son was born, my husband wanted to share the care as much as possible. But when he was around, I wanted him to experience how hard it could be to look after a young baby."

Of course you did. You've every right to share the tough bits with him as well as the fun bits.

"Perversely, I willed our son to puke and scream when he was with him."

Luckily with babies you don't have to will too hard to get puking and screaming. But if you get stuck a quiet spoonful of Sunny Delight should do the trick.

"When this wish was granted, I would look on coldly, offering no assistance, glad that he was finding it difficult."

Why should you have offered assistance? Your husband knows how to mop up puke. You get a bit of kitchen roll, mop up the puke, bin it. Remember this man is a dashing executive in a Ferragamo neckerchief. (Honestly I don't even know how to spell Ferragamo, that is how little I care!)

"On other occasions, when he was changing the baby’s nappy, putting him in the pram or dressing him, I would bossily interject, scolding my husband for his ineptitude and taking over the task."

Well either he was doing it wrong. In which case a quick "that's not nappy cream, it's Deep Heat" would be fair enough. Or he wasn't, in which case see under post-natal depression. Of course it's infuriating to see him coping with the job when he only has to do it once a week and you have to do it twenty times a day. You must be thinking that he doesn't appreciate the work you put in.

"I wanted him to understand how gruelling it was to live my new life. Yet I risked discouraging him from getting involved."

Why is it your job to encourage him to get involved? How would you do that anyway? Write the latest Arsenal results on the kids' arse? He should be encouraged to get involved by (a) sense of fairness, (b) the fact that you are visibly exhausted (look! no nail varnish!) and (c) the fact that the kid contains 50% HIS genetic material.

"Looking after children can be tedious and gruelling. For many men, if it’s a choice between spending an extra hour at the office or getting back home in time to wrestle irritable offspring into a bath, they will take the former."

But it's precisely because it's tedious and gruelling that mothers need help with it, need nights off. If your husband is deliberately leaving all the tedious, gruelling work to you, he is a dick.

"Time your return right, however, and the children will come running to the door, calmed down, scrubbed up and ready for sleep, greeting you like the Railway Children reunited with Father. Then all you have to do is help them potter off to bed and give them a kiss as they tell you they love you, Daddy."

Sadly once they've gone to bed you may notice your wife looks like death and is still crying after a month and a half. This is your cue to remember that the Railway Children was a work of fiction for a bygone era and step up to the plate a bit.

"Fathers’ reluctance to get involved in the day-to-day graft of childcare is rarely challenged. Men have too little resolve to resist the cultural norms, government policy and employer practice that herds them into a secondary parenting role."

Right so we need to change cultural norms, government policy and employer practice. Go!

"And as mothers, we don’t always help ourselves. We begin to use the role of expert foisted upon us as a weapon against fathers."

As (ridiculously unsupported) mothers don't women have enough to worry about already without having to pretend not to be an expert so we don't upset the idiot who's overtly avoiding doing his cut of the housework and parenting?

"It starts from the first weeks of motherhood. We begin chiding our partner for the way he fastens a nappy or holds a bottle, and the criticism continues down the years as we throw up our hands at the school shoes he buys or his inadequate attention to detail over holiday club arrangements."

What do men need? "Yeah you put a nappy on!", cue fanfare and dancing girls. Yes parenting is pretty thankless. Does he whoop and holler with joy when you do these things (wrong)?

"I can recall grabbing the pram from my husband’s hands in order to strap in our baby to my satisfaction and making critical comments about how he chooses to spend the days he looks after our son."

Hey here's a great idea - just head out with the baby only loosely half-fastened to the pram. I mean what's the worst that can happen? He drops it down a drain? Oh well, you can make another one... And yes it's a huge issue when parents look after kids and one parent does either nothing much or takes the kid to all the fun places and leaves the other parent to do all the chores.

"As another mother told me: ‘Could I relinquish control and allow my husband to help? Probably not, because I wouldn’t be confident that it would be done to my standards.’"

So one of two things is going on - either he missed out on learning parenting skills, probably because of cultural norms (not being given baby dolls, etc as a child) or because of government policy (he only got two weeks paternity leave) or even employer practice (not being able to leave early when needed). Or he's faking incompetence to avoid hard work. And I wouldn't put it past him - he's already been hanging round the office and extra hour to avoid helping with bathtime. And if your standards are so high - congratulations, you're a great parent! Half the country just throws a frozen microwave meal at the kids and wipes them down with a Wet One when they start to smell stale.

"Women are inconsistent, claiming they are frustrated with having to deal with the majority of the domestic burden, yet are at the same time unwilling to cede any control over home life."

New mothers with post-natal depression are definitely inconsistent. They need support... And you're not claiming you're frustrated - you ARE frustrated. With good reason.

"Fathers can feel excluded and back off — even get depressed. Many men talk of the pressure not to put a foot wrong."

Oh poor poor men. The stress of feeling they have to not feed car tyres to their newborn. Having a kid is hard work. If that makes you back off - you are (have I mentioned this?) a dick.

"Beyond their own homes, women can also be guilty of maternal gatekeeping. Although mothers collectively rage at fathers for not taking responsibility for their children, the valiant few who do try to ‘cross the border’ are often treated warily, ignored or intimidated."

Where are the statistics on this? Most of the hands-on dads I know are idolised and one of them definitely uses his son as a talking point to chat up attractive young mums in the playground. And you were just moaning a few minutes ago that you only get to hang out with other women and you missed hanging out with men. So you in theory would be extra-welcoming to these dads.

"I know of one father who was asked to leave when he tried to take his daughter along to her mother-and-baby swim class."

Probably should have worn trunks. Seriously you have a single anecdote to prove your whole point? And I already demonstrated YOU are an example of someone who feels the opposite way. Counter-argument complete.

"Rather than realising that encouraging men to play a fair part in raising their families will pay dividends for both fathers and mothers, and, most importantly, children, mothers hoard the domestic power they are left with."

Yes women, we need to encourage men to do their fair share. In fact we need to do our fair share, most of their fair share and 100% of the encouraging. Don't plan to sit down.

"Rather than try to fight the forces they are up against, from inflexible work to costly childcare, women decide instead to sulk. Women sulk at work and sulk at home, wallowing in martyrdom and indulging in territorialism."

Yes women stop sulking, paste on a smile and laugh it off as your inept husband comes home in the middle of the night drunk and tries to feed bar snacks to the child you've just spent 8 hours getting to sleep. And you can only really wallow in martyrdom if you have been martyred. That may be the root of the problem. And if you have been martyred I think you should probably be entitled to a quick wallow, remember to keep that broom up your arse while you do it though!

"When not sulking we submit, unquestioningly buying the male line and even — sometimes — taking the view that it’s a ticket out of the stresses of modern life."

Yes don't submit to it women. Just leave your kids in the street and soon enough Papa's gonna realise he needs to pull his socks up. Women aren't unquestioningly buying the male line, they're unquestioningly buying the "wrong to neglect your child" line. And thank fuck somebody does!

"In each of these ways mothers prop up their inequality, reinforcing stereotypes and preconceptions rather than working to break them down. In so doing, we become only more securely imprisoned within the domestic realm."

So the way to liberate ourselves from this is (1) paste on a smile over the post-natal depression and pretend everything's ok, (2) do all the unpleasant work and then whoop with delight when your husband spends half an afternoon watching them sleep through Football Focus, (3) don't submit to it, make a fuss, stand up for your rights (p.s. If rule 3 contradicts any of the other rules you be sure and let me know huh?).

"Only by challenging our own attitudes, as well as those of others, do we have the power to reverse our descent into unhappiness and create a life with which we are truly content."

Confucius also say: woman who shit in own backyard probably not need dachshund. What a load of toss. If the problem of the overburdening of women with parental care could be solved by positive thinking we would have been hanging around in the cavemouth shouting "hey gorgeous, y'know that giraffe-skin loin cloth would look great with a dab of gooey turd on it". But that doesn't work!! DOES NOT WORK.

What we need - and you actually fucking said this before you accidentally dropped your intellect into the blender with the fairtrade bananas - is three things: a change in cultural norms, a change in government policy and a change in employer practice. And one more for good luck: a serious reduction in women-blaming bullshit from Britain's worst national newspaper.

Man Opposes Government Action, Eats Lunch

2011-03-29T02:09:00.006+01:00

The second largest protest ever to hit the streets of London took place last Saturday. Around half a million people opposed to the government's planned assault on benefits and public sector jobs made their feelings known. The Daily Fail of course has the behind-the-scenes scoop. Cos y'know the infront-of-the-scenes scoop - the half a million people against the cuts - wouldn't be interesting enough would it? So lets have ourselves a little line-by-line shall we...

"After the riots, a portrait of a Fortnum & Mason's invader lunching at his castle by SAM GREENHILL and RYAN KISIEL"

Riots? What riots? I mean I know there was some spray painting but I'm not sure I'd call it a riot.

"To the descendant of a baronet, who grew up in a castle, the splendour of Fortnum & Mason must have seemed like a home from home."

No-one's home looks like Fortnum and Mason's. If it does, you've ordered too many jars of marinated olives.

"But unfortunately for Adam Ramsay, the police did not see it that way and arrested him for aggravated trespass and criminal damage."

Yes and a video on the Guardian website clearly shows that was a terrible miscarriage of justice. The sort of thing any self-respecting newspaper would cover.

"Yesterday, the young aristocrat was ruminating on his night in a police cell alongside other protesters who had stormed the luxury Piccadilly grocer."

Based on what I've seen he would have been ruminating on the unreasonable police behaviour.

"However, unlike most of his fellow activists campaigning against the cuts to public services, Ramsay, 25, hails from a remarkably privileged background."

Is this the Daily Mail asking me to hate the rich? I mean we can talk but I'm just checking this is your new editorial policy. You might want to mention it to Melanie Phillips and Dick Littlejohn.

"He comes from a long line of Ramsay baronets starting in 1666 and ending with the 12th baronet who died in 1986."

Confusingly if the 12th baronet died and there wasn't another one, that would seem to imply that line has run out of descendants. But does this affect his opinions about the government? If not it seems oddly irrelevant.

"The family seat is Bamff House – described by them as a ‘small castle’ – set in a stunning 1,300-acre estate in East Perthshire, Scotland."

So I've got a great game you can play with all your family. Imagine you're a penniless working class riot-loving protestor furious at the way the rich are ripping you off. Now, look at these two "castles" and decide which one you should trust the owner of:

(a)

(b)

Well castle (a) is owned by some member of Adam Ramsay's family, allegedly. And castle (b) is owned by Viscount Rothermere, chairman of the Daily Mail. Seriously the alleged Ramsay "castle" would make a really disappointing National Trust day out.

"The magnificent pile boasts more than 15 rooms and an ancient tower, with views stretching over hills, fields and woods that have been owned by the Ramsay family since 1232."

Yes, they're talking about castle (a), and yes they use exactly that same photo, and yes they haven't put any quote marks round the word "magnificent". And the extravagance of fifteen rooms rather depends how many people are there.

"Wild boars roam the estate and, in the pheasant season, the Ramsays offer guests the chance to go shooting."

They have guests? So some of the 15 rooms are rented out to guests? How do they find room for the stable-master and all the scullery maids?

"But despite their aristocratic lineage, they may have more reason than some to oppose government cuts – for they recently received a £40,000 gift from the taxpayer to fund a new boiler at the castle."

Meanwhile Viscount Rothermere despite living at the actual castle, is registered as non-domiciled in the UK for tax purposes. But lets hear more about an overpriced boiler shall we?

"Yesterday, Ramsay came under fire from other activists who mocked him over the grant, which was paid by an arm of the Scottish government."

I can find no evidence of this. Not a scratch. Most people were sending him messages of support and concern about his treatment by the police.

"He responded on social networking website Twitter, claiming the public money had been a ‘renewable energy grant for the farm’."

No he didn't - really I've been through every post he made on Twitter yesterday and he didn't say any such thing. He says the Daily Mail have been round his parent's house and openly admits he is a bit posh.

"Ramsay – whose family motto is ‘Ora et Labora’, which means ‘Pray and Work’ – also wrote a long internet post describing how he was arrested following the occupation of Fortnum & Mason."

Dang! My best latin translation was "ears and labia"... How does this affect my opinion of him? Does his coat of arms include an image of a guy with a megaphone shouting "David Cameron's a fucking idiot"? Perhaps one day it will...

"Ramsay spent the night in a cell at Ilford police station before being charged the next morning with aggravated trespass. He said the criminal damage allegation was dropped."

So he WAS charged but he only SAID the criminal damage allegation was dropped. Shame we can't ring the police station and check. But hey, we're not a national newspaper or anything.

"Since leaving Edinburgh University, he has worked for a student campaigning network called People & Planet, based in Oxford, as its activism, volunteering and events manager."

Is this a typo? Did you mean horsed about in a Barbour jacket taking pot shots at clay pigeons?

"Last night, several messages were posted under Ramsay’s blog by readers mocking his background."

Yes I think the Daily Mail should be reporting on comments made under a blog post. And if you can't find any, why not add some comments yourself?

"One of them pretended to be his mother, writing: ‘Adam darling, We’ve got no caviar left and the staff have taken the day orf... please be a dear and pick some beluga up when you and your Uni chums pop into Fortnums... Mwah, mwah, Mumsy.’"

Wow, thanks Daily Mail. Let me be the first to break the latest news: someone else has added "I’m not clever enough to discus politics here, so il just call you a moron and hope you suffer instead Moron!!!!!!!!!!!11111!!!!". Why has this not been reported by the BBC?!

"Ramsay was released on police bail and is due to face Westminster magistrates in May."

Yeah due to face magistrates charged with "aggravated trespass" for sitting on the floor of a public shop and not causing any damage. Perhaps they'll find him a cell next to Ronnie and Reggie? I suspect more than £40,000 of taxpayers money is now being wasted attempting to prosecute a man for singing in a tea shop.

"Responding to a request for comment, last night he sent the Mail a message saying: ‘I think people with all kinds of backgrounds are starting to see that these cuts threaten to undermine our economy and ruin people’s lives.’"

Exactly. And your response to that is? No, no, don't strain yourself. Just change the subject, no-one will notice!

"Meanwhile, it emerged last night that the founder of UK Uncut – the protest group that arranged the invasion of Fortnum & Mason – makes taxpayer-funded films for the BBC."

Yes everyone who works for the BBC is taxpayer-funded. I did a BBC Radio Five Live interview this evening about whether men should pay for dinner on a first date. This was taxpayer-funded. Since your chairman doesn't pay any tax, I, who do pay tax, will be the authority on how to spend it, thanks.

"Thom Costello, a 22-year-old Oxford graduate, works as an assistant producer for CTVC, a television production company that has worked for the BBC’s One Show and Newsnight."

So he works FOR a company that has worked FOR the BBC. Are you trying to smear his character cos you're really not doing all that well here? You should probably go on about the other guy and the fancy Bed and Breakfast his parents run. Knock yourselves out - see if you can interview a labrador.

"Yesterday Mr Costello said: ‘I was not involved in organising the occupation of Fortnum & Mason’s and I was neither inside nor outside Fortnum & Mason on Saturday."

On other pages: Geri Haliwell also not at protest! This is looking like a quiet news day.

"‘In fact, I was in a pub having a drink with a friend whilst the sit-in at the shop took place.’"

Man not at protest, it's a great story, lets run with it, look for an interview... Hang on, stop press, stop press, I think we've got one...

"His father Martin, 53, who runs a theatre in Catford, South London, said: ‘He would not organise anything like that."

Breaking news: man's father corroborates "not at protest" story.

"‘To say he is the mastermind is inaccurate. It’s ridiculous.’"

Is there any chance we can ask Martin to take a few minutes a week off from running his Catford theatre and get him to edit the Daily Mail, cos I think he'd have had the sense to scratch this one before it got this out of hand...?

Because the whole piece is just stupid. If the rich cannot speak up for the poor, the able-bodied for the disabled, if white people in power cannot speak up for black people denied it, men speak up for women's rights or straight people speak up for marginalised gay communities, then where the hell are we? The people who will be worst affected by the cuts Cameron and Osborne are planning were not in Fortnum and Masons on Saturday, and not on the streets protesting, they were stuck working overtime in dead end jobs, trapped in their homes by disability, financial deprivation and responsibility for the care of those the Big Society has long since left behind. We need every body we can get behind this movement, latin family motto or not.

Dream On

2011-03-24T00:21:00.003Z

Dear Jamie Oliver,

So while attempting to have a night off tonight I decided to watch your "Dream School" show. I thought the idea of using big names to try to inspire and educate kids who had been failed by the education system was interesting. I liked the notion of finding out how much difference a good school and great teachers could make.

However one thing on tonights show made me really angry. One of the students, a young mum, arrived at school with her child - the kid had chicken pox and so couldn't attend a normal daycare centre. The student was sent home and left the program in floods of tears saying that having a child had ruined all her chances in life.

Can't we even DREAM of a future where a really good school would be able to help a woman in that situation? Is a school hardship fund to cover emergency childcare something we can't even DREAM of? Or what about the possibility of one of the teachers (perhaps someone who has had chickenpox as a child so isn't at risk) going round to visit her later and providing one-to-one catch-up.

To be quite frank - call me - I will gladly do either or both of those tasks. And yes I've had chickenpox!

Add to that that earlier in the same show when other students were bullying her over her status as a young mum the response was to encourage her to toughen up rather than to educate the other pupils to think more carefully about what they were saying. Frankly I can't help thinking your school needs a really good sex education teacher - not of the Anne Widdicombe "it's immoral!!" school of education but, frankly, again, me.

If we as a nation are to accept the message you claim to spread about improving our society and giving our young people the opportunities they deserve we have to include young parents in that. Not least because they are the ones raising the next generation of young people.

And what message are you sending to the wider world if your response to the issues of time management which affect parents is to chuck them out immediately without even sitting down to try and figure out a way of working around the problem? It is deeply irresponsible.

But my guess is it's just inconvenient for you to change your filming schedule or give up a little bit of your free time to actually help someone else. Once the cameras are off the enthusiasm for helping others is off too.

Well some of us don't take that attitude. As I've said above I'd be happy to help. And I mean that whether the cameras are on or off. Seriously contact me, your school could use a head of feminism I expect.

Yours Kate

Comedy Fundraiser for Platform 51

2011-03-21T23:14:00.002Z

Hi all

So tickets are now on sale for my latest comedy fundraiser. We're doing a night for Platform 51 (which is what used to be YWCA but has changed it's name cos it's not a religious organisation anymore, but runs drop-in centres for women across the country), I've been doing some work with them lately and can't enthuse hard enough about what they're doing. Working with single mums, women with drug problems and training women and giving them practical help to get back into the workplace, you can see it all on their website.

AND you can support this work while having a great time. We've got Isy Suttie (who plays Dobbie in Peep Show) coming down plus Liz Carr from BBC Ouch and Abnormally Funny People, and Tiff Stevenson who's been in everything from Balls of Steel to Footballers Wives. Plus a little bit of comedy theatre from Kiki Kendrick and, well, me of course!

It's happening on Weds 30th Mar and lots more info and tickets are available on the Soho Comedy Club website here. (footnotes: venue is over-18s, and in theory not really accessible but Liz Carr is going to get her wheelchair up the stairs to perform so if we can do something to help your accessibility needs - we will).

Hope to see you there! Please book quickly I think it'll sell out.

xx Kate

Women and the Internet

2011-03-20T23:43:00.003Z

In 1970 Germaine Greer wrote "Women have very little idea of how much men hate them". Well on behalf of women everywhere I'd like to say a big thank you to the internet for making it abundantly clear.

A couple of days ago the popular and deeply talented comedienne Shappi Khorsandi tweeted "I never understand why people get so cross if they don't like a comedian. I never lose sleep over bands I'm not in to.". It doesn't take much research to figure out she's referring to the reaction she gets on the internet. And I should know because my work gets exactly the same reaction. Flicking through our videos on YouTube, or those of any female act, there are stacks of nasty comments and repeated evidence of comments which have been removed. I know at least once a week I take such remarks down from the videos I have posted myself, footage others have taken of me I just have to leave. Some are just straight attacks on our work, some criticise our appearance and some attack all women in comedy.

In some ways it makes no sense that people who purport to hate my work have taken the time to watch so much of it. If I see internet videos that aren't to my liking, I don't even finish watching them, I look up something else. And even the notion of making negative comments about comedy is odd. Clearly comedy is subjective, what makes you laugh varies from person to person. Because something doesn't make me laugh doesn't mean it's "not funny", it means it's not the sort of comedy I want to watch. So I don't.

But of course what's going on is not odd at all - it's just the joy of internet anonymity letting these men express the hatred Greer knew all about 40 years ago. Why should Shappi's, or my appearance even be relevant? Only if you think that as women it is somehow our job to be sexually attractive to all men at all times. Plus the comments so often come down to an issue of overt misogyny. "Women aren't funny", which makes as much sense as "men can't sing" or "gay people make bad dentists".

And I would add - before anyone suggests that it's just a random internet abuse issue - that my husband (a less experienced comic than me) gets no abuse whatsoever. He has never had a nasty comment added to a video or online review of him.

Most of these sites are moderated in some way but no-one seems to take down overtly misogynist remarks. And they appear on the same review sites that promoters check before deciding who to book for their shows. And below the video links I want to send out as showreels to people looking for acts. I'd like to imagine good promoters can see past this sort of thing but at a subconscious level all that negativity has to seep in.

And much as I'd like to claim it doesn't - it affects me too. It erodes my confidence. And it eats up my time dealing with it, deleting comments and getting myself back into a frame of mind where I can work.

Of course all those negative effects work the other way too, so if you've got a few minutes to yourself here's an idea for a random act of feminism - look up half a dozen female acts on YouTube or Chortle and say something nice! You might even enjoy the videos...

You Have Been Reading...

2011-03-10T23:53:00.001Z

...The seventh most important feminist blog in the UK. Apparently. No-one tell Cath Elliot I'm two whole places ahead of her, I'm sure that's a typo!

What's Happening, Why Am I Suddenly So Angry?

2011-02-24T03:41:00.004Z

I think it might be because I've been reading this article in the Daily Fail about wristbands potentially (not) being developed to "let men know" when a woman is suffering PMT. Either that or I better pop out and buy some more tampons.*

Well obviously these items are deeply offensive to women.

Firstly - if women are experiencing depression or mood disorders for whatever reason and want those around them to know - they can tell them (y'know what with us being sentient adult beings and all that...). One would hope they would be treated with sympathy and support.

On a larger scale though - for centuries women have been told that their femininity renders them inferior. We've been assigned everything from "the vapors" and "consumption" to the insistence that we have "feeble minds" and claims that periods render us everything from "unclean" to "incapable of making sushi"(seriously - this is why in Japan sushi chefs are almost all male!).

All of these theories have emerged to be completely false and the notion that women are less capable of managing their emotions during certain times of the month seem likely to hold just as little water. Note that these wristbands have not actually been invented - because a wristband absolutely 100% could never tell what stage a woman's menstrual cycle is at. The suggestion by the company that has raised the idea is that it would respond to subtle temperature changes but fertility testing kits which work based on body temperature take that temperature orally or rectally so you would literally have to stuff your wristband up your arse!!

Instead this story just serves to continue to promote the idea that women's menstrual cycles are the source of some problem and that men need "warning" about the stage of the cycle a woman is in (not mentioning that she may be pre-pubescent, post-menopausal, pregnant, suffering amenorrhea, trans-gendered or for any number of medical reasons, not having periods). Two women a week are murdered in this country by their male partners. Perhaps men should wear wristbands that read "I'm a man, I might attack you"...**

*Yeah, like fuck, we all know I have a Mooncup right?

**Hey trolls - why not quote this sentence out of context and then claim I hate men? Wouldn't that be fun? Try to spend all week doing it so you'll not be bothering me!

The Trouble With TV

2011-02-20T19:05:00.004Z

Here's an article from Chortle about a new TV show that's searching for new comedy talent. And a quote: Freddie Foss-Smith from producers Big Talk ... said: ‘I’m looking for unknown and relatively new comedians that might not necessarily have even done a gig before but might just have what it takes.'

Right, let me stop you there. Cos I happen to be of the opinion that one of the things that "it takes" to be a successful comedian is "to have done a gig before". The idea that comedy is innate and that people "just have" it or "just don't" is ridiculous. Not that some people don't have more or less natural talent than others, but if you look at the really really brilliant comedians of the last few decades: Billy Connolly, Eddie Izzard, Victoria Wood, etc, one thing they all have in common is they have put the hours in learning the trade the hard way*.

On the good news side meanwhile a TV pilot show I wrote has been commissioned to be turned in to a 13-episode series. It's a satirical news show called Network. It'll be broadcast by Press TV (Iranian) but all Sky customers worldwide will be able to watch it if they dig far enough through the channel listings. I'm not in it (Mr Cru is) because will funding coming out of Iran it's an all-male cast. Still I am listed as chief writer and actually I'm the only writer aside from a bit of input from the cast themselves and the director. Hopefully it'll lead to more work for me.

* And by the way "the hard way" is also "the only way that works".

The Irony of Pro-Life!

2011-02-16T00:57:00.001Z

Also the best reason to bang your head against a handy wall...

Mini-Mail line-by-line

2011-02-01T01:49:00.002Z

Have you eaten something with sugar in in the last 48 hours? Fear not, the Daily Fail's "femail" section is here to judge you in a classic piece of woman-bashing called "Chocolate bars for breakfast, HobNobs at work... Keeping a diary of treats will help you stop calorific snacking". Here's the first three lines:

"Diets are doomed to fail because British women snack so much, experts claimed earlier this month."

Of course it's only women who are on diets. And no, before you read on, no information is supplied about the academic track record of these "experts"...

"More than half of us admit to eating at least two unhealthy treats a day, with an alarming one in seven confessing to five episodes of naughtiness."

Naughtiness? As far as I know the word "naughtiness" is generally reserved for the under-fives and people who like to incorporate some light spanking into their foreplay.

"But does the average British women really gorge on more than 1,000 treats a year?"

No she doesn't gorge on 1,000 treats. She EATS 1,000 treats. How many treats a year do men aggressively binge on? And by the way - lager counts.

Then there's a very boring passage where a woman (Lorraine) makes a list of the "naughty" treats she's had this week. Its not clear to me whether she doesn't count desserts (maybe you get 1 hour from starting to eat to count it as part of the meal) or doesn't eat them (cos, you know, she's a woman...). And in between our "expert" Zoe criticises these food choices without sympathy. And apparently the main advantage of not eating snacks is "not feeling guilty". Hmm... No-one seems to care that the disadvantages of eating less treats are (1) being fucking hungry and (2) not getting to eat nice things that you like.

And then there's a conclusion:

"I've eaten an extra 3,690 calories in just a week through snacking — that’s nearly two days worth of extra food and would result in a weight gain of a pound if eaten on top of the 2,000 calories the average woman needs a day."

Yeah but half of the snacks were instead of a meal. And they included things like nuts and cheese. Things you could quite legitimately include in a meal.

"I’m staggered and feel distressed not just by the number of calories, but by what I’ve discovered about myself. "

You discovered you like sweets and crisps? And that's distressing? HEy could be worse - could turn out you like crack...

"I genuinely thought this diary might be a bit thin on the ground because, until I wrote everything down, I was convinced I didn’t snack that much. But I just haven’t noticed that I do."

Thank God for the Daily Male - handing you a big stick to beat yourself up with...

"So how do I stop? I call Sian Porter of the British Dietetic Association for advice."

I sure hope she's on emergency speed-dial.

"‘It’s quite hard to refuse a friend, so if they’re cutting a cake, ask for a small slice and eat half,’ she says. "

Really? My friends actually like me so they tend not to force cake on me if I politely say no thank you.

"‘If they reach for a packet of biscuits, say: “Don’t open them on my account.” "

Or - stop press - no thank you.

"‘It may seem strange, but use the same tricks as people with eating disorders — tell others you ate before you came out or that you’re going out for dinner and don’t want to spoil it."

Yes use the same tricks as people with eating disorders ... survive on 500 calories a day until your bones become brittle and damaged, your internal organs start to digest themselves and you, erm, die as one in five eating disorder sufferers do. If an expert from the British Dietetic Association advised women to act like they have an eating disorder, I think that expert should be struck off. Obviously.

"‘And if you know you’re going to miss a meal, plan ahead. If it’s dinner, eat a larger portion at lunchtime or have a healthy snack such as a bowl of soup or cereal at 5pm. That will tide you over until you get home."

So I can have Cocoa Pops at 5pm and that's healthy? Bonza...

"‘Be prepared so when you get hungry you have something appropriate — buy single servings of dried fruit or nuts. And have a rule that you eat only when sitting down at a table — most snacking is done standing up or on the run.’"

Now first up early on you were telling her that nuts were "naughty", make your mind up. And of course most snacking is done standing up or on the run - that's the definition, and the point, of snacking isn't it?

"It’s advice I plan to take to heart. And before you start criticising my snacking, why not jot down everything you eat. You may be surprised . . ."

I wasn't going to criticise your snacking. I was going to tell you you clearly have a busy life, maybe you should focus on your achievements and not bother with a pointless diet.

What is WRONG with Giles Coren?!!

2011-01-28T03:41:00.007Z

I can only presume the Daily Male were advertising for a columnist and Giles Coren thought - fuck it, there's a recession on, I'll just put my sense of decency in this handy dustbin, I could sure use the money. Here's the line-by-line on a little piece called So why is it all right for women to be sexist about MEN?

"The two Sky Sports presenters who were caught on tape making disparaging remarks about women earlier this week are a pair of daft old duffers, and no mistake. It is important for me to say that first, before I get to the business in hand."

Well before I start let me say on behalf of women everywhere: thank you. Good to have you on our side for once.

"Andy Gray and Richard Keys are a couple of dull, flabby, middle-aged football bores and are just the sort of doddering old clowns you would expect to relax off camera by swapping ancient prejudices and poking fun at women — in this case a female linesman — for not understanding the offside rule."

I wasn't personally in favour of sacking them because of their age and weight. I'd call that ageism and sizeism. For me the problem was the whole sexism thing.

"You shouldn’t pass unflattering remarks about women behind their backs because it is not a well brought-up thing to do, and they needed to be told. I would never do it myself. Not because I am a feminist, but because I am a gentleman."

Oh so now it's classism? You don't believe women deserve equal rights and opportunities (that would be feminism), you believe working class people shouldn't have good jobs.

"But while Gray has now been sacked, I don’t expect that will be the end of the matter."

Lets hope not. Let's hope that the public consciousness on the matter has been raised far enough to wonder just briefly if we're really all ok with a 5.1% rape conviction rate or a pay gap the size of the rift valley.

"We will hear an endless shrieking to ‘kick sexism out of football’; a PE teacher will be fired for telling his goalkeeper to ‘stop crying like a girl’; and a hapless League One manager will be deported for describing a fight between players as ‘handbags at dawn’."

Wow - sexism in football getting the same treatment racism has had in the past. Yes that would really be going too far wouldn't it? And PE teachers (who by the way are all male) and League One managers should be allowed to be sexist if they like too.

"There will be the endless apologies, public soul-searching and self-flagellation. And as usual the rest of us men will be expected to atone as a sex for a couple of remarks by two fat, superannuated fools on the telly, and to grovel for forgiveness with every snivel and cringe of our waking lives."

How many times have you grovelled and snivelled about this one so far Giles? I've counted none. Nor have I so far asked any men I know ever to apologise for remarks made by other men. On the contrary the world of "other men" will be distinctly enhanced by the recent events in one obvious way: two of them are about to get jobs as commentators on Sky Sports...

"Not that that’s anything new. To be a man in this country is constantly to have to apologise for oneself and to be ever so very careful about every sentence we speak or write which contains any reference at all to members of the opposite sex."

If you have to be "ever so very careful" to avoid making overt sexist remarks Giles, then please go right ahead and be "ever so very careful". You would think you wouldn't need to worry though what with how frightfully well brought up you are and all that...

"While at the same time, and this is the shame of it, we ourselves are fair game for women. While sexism from men is the outstanding social crime of the modern world, women can say absolutely whatever they like about us."

Really? I said a few times on air this week that I thought it was right that Andy Gray was sacked (an opinion it appears you agree with though for odd and different reasons). Since then I've had the usual string of abusive messages on my blog, facebook and email. My work has been attacked on public forums by people who've clearly never seen it. And just for raising the issue I've been accused of "moaning" and told in no uncertain terms to get over it. I dread to imagine what would happen if I made an actual sexist remark against men.

"For make no mistake: sexism is alive and well in this country and applauded in all quarters — as long as it is practised by women. And they are allowed to say the most terrible, terrible things."

Hold on these are two very different things. Women are paid less, lack power, property and respect in every level of our society. Women (the oppressed group) are very much entitled to highlight their situation with humour and make comment on how to escape it. Men (the oppressing group) are not welcome to use humour to reinforce and perpetuate those negative attitudes and stereotypes.

"Only last week, for example, Jo Brand, the newly crowned Best Female TV Comic at the British Comedy Awards, was on Have I Got News For You and replied to the question ‘What’s your favourite kind of man, Jo?’ by saying: ‘A dead one.’ Oh, how the audience fell about. And the other contestants, all male, chortled away too."

On Tuesday night I watched a male comic say he had sex with his wife while she was asleep. Luckily, he remarked, she sleeps with her mouth open. Your go Giles.

"I’m not saying it wasn’t funny. I’m just saying we live in a world where the thorough-going awfulness, uselessness and superfluity of the male sex is such a given, that a frontline television comic can get big laughs by saying she’d prefer it if we were all dead."

We also live in a country where due to the violence experienced by women at the hands of their male partners and ex-partners two of us every week actually do end up dead. Hence why the other way round the joke doesn't really work.

"And I’m trying to imagine a world in which I am on that show and they say, ‘What kind of women do you like, Giles?’ and I reply: ‘Dead ones.’ I just don’t think it would get the same laughs, do you?"

Ah well let me explain the nature of humour Giles. Humour arises from the unexpected. There's nothing unexpected about a man killing or wanting to kill a woman. I get death threats fairly regularly from men who find an opinionated outspoken woman who believes in actual equality an unbearable possibility. Do you?

"Here’s another of Jo Brand’s (excellent) gags. ‘What’s the way to a man’s heart? Straight through the chest with a kitchen knife!’ Again, not unfunny. But predicated on the idea that killing men is hilarious. Whereas killing women, as we all know, is a very serious affair and not to be joked about."

Actually killing women, as I explained above, is a fact of life in the UK. And a fact of life that neither the government nor the police seem all that bothered about.

"It’s not just Brand, it’s all women. ‘What do you call the useless flap of skin attached to a penis?’ they joke. ‘A man!’ they all reply, and clink their chardonnay glasses and chortle till dawn. How on earth did this get to be OK?"

Well two things: (1) Earlier on you complained you and all other men were expected to take the blame for Andy Gray. Now you are blaming me and all women for remarks made by Jo Brand. Fuck off. (2) What parties do you go too?! Chardonnay? Did your parents spend all that money on your upbringing only for you to spend your evenings in Yate's wine lodge? I last heard that "joke" when I was about 16 and I don't remember it being funny or interesting then.

"I’ll tell you how. It is because pretty much from birth women are schooled by their mothers to deride men. They are sugar and spice, we are slugs and snails."

If only women were all well brought up like you eh? Shame your expensive prep school probably doesn't even take girls. What's the word for that? Oh that's it - discrimination!!

"They are reflective and sensitive, while we run around kicking balls and shouting. And then as girls push towards puberty their mothers take them aside and tell them: ‘Boys are only after one thing!’"

Firstly I'm not sure that is what parents do to girls any more. I think they're just a touch more nuanced than that though since you grew up in a Victorian novel perhaps you had it differently. But secondly if we "warn" girls that boys only want sex, we seem to be simultaneously warning girls that they don't (or shouldn't) want sex, that they won't (or shouldn't) like it and certainly shouldn't have it. All lies. We (if we do, I think a lot of modern parents are past this though) are effectively telling our girls that regardless of their personality, their academic achievements and physical strength, their true value lies in their virginity. That's a horrible hateful message that values women purely in their desirability to men.

"The great lie. All men want is sex. Not so. If anything, it is women who think only of having it off. Girls on average lose their virginity much younger than boys and have more sexual partners in youth."

Girls on average go through puberty earlier than men. And excluding the gay community men and women have to be having, overall, the same number of partners, if girls have more sexual partners in their youth (and you would think he would lay on some statistics here cos I'm not familiar with this "fact") men must be having more when they're older. Dirty fuckers...

"As a teenager, I was terribly shy about sex and yet girls were trying to do it with me all the time. I used to run, literally run, from their bedrooms when they tried it on. And yet women are allowed endlessly to harangue us with our supposed lechery."

As a teenager I never ever, not once, got as far as a boy's bedroom seeking sex and then had him run away. Not that there aren't sexually forward women and sexually inactive men, but I don't see any evidence to suggest your experience was typical Giles. And lechery is actually very different from wanting to have sex. If you want to have sex with someone, you can ask them out. There's no need to be lecherous. Lechery is stuff like overtly gawping at someone's body, making repeated sexual remarks, etc. The vast majority of lecherous people would jump out of their skin if the object of their attention turned round and said "ok, lets have sex".

"And the prejudice festers. Harriet Harman says that men caused the banking crisis, and the harridan legions nod their heads. ‘If women ruled the world,’ they cry, ‘there would be no wars.’ "

So name the women behind the banking crisis? Is Fred the Shred short for Frederica? And a minute ago you were saying you had to watch every word you said - now you are calling women harridans. Maybe you should add that word to your special dictionary of words to watch out for...

"What nonsense. Women are far meaner, more brutal, aggressive, small-minded, jealous, petty and venal than any man."

If women are so much more brutal, why do we commit so much less of the domestic violence, the street violence and the crime in this country?

"If women ruled the world countries would be invaded because ‘she’s always been jealous of my feet’ and because ‘she looks down on me for going out to work’."

Which women are these? Not the ones in my life. I've never known anyone look down on another person (male or female) for "going out to work". You really have to be super-super rich to fail to appreciate the necessity of earning a living in this world. You might as well look down on people for eating yogurt with a soup spoon. Peasants!!

"Millions would die, torture would increase. If women ruled the world there would be carnage."

Yes women who right now commit a tiny tiny fraction of the violence in the world would definitely get into power and decide to kick things off with a big old round of torture. Is your article based on anything but hate?

"And what sort of an insult is it anyway to suggest that most women don’t understand the offside rule? It’s true, for a start. Most women don’t. And most of them declare it proudly."

Erm, how badly are you not getting this. Andy Gray and Richard Keys were saying a female linesman - with a professional refereeing qualification - didn't understand the offside rule. That's like saying a dentist can't fix teeth because of her gender. It's rude and way out of line (pun intended).

"Most of them use football as an example of one of their favourite gags, the one about how men never grow up, about how we’re all just children — most often manifested in the one where a mother-of-two says ‘I’ve got three children’, you raise an eyebrow, and she nods towards her husband. Hilarious."

How awful it must be for these men to be looked after like a child - to have their food made for them, be exempted from housework and their clothes laid out every morning. If you don't want to be called a child - act like an adult.

"And nor are men, in this female narrative, merely puerile, aggressive and underdeveloped. They are hypochondriacs, too."

Amazing that in the face of all these inadequacies we've let so many into the cabinet isn't it? Not to mention the management of all the big companies...

"‘He’s got a touch of man flu,’ say the womenfolk and titter. But what nonsense is that? It is women who make a big fuss about mild discomfort, not men."

I even saw this one on Mythbusters and it was proved the other way - women had a much higher pain threshold than men. Also by the way "titter" is misogynist for "laugh".

"I have never had so much as a cold in my life, nor claimed to. I even suspect sometimes that the whole palaver about the pain of childbirth is a conspiracy to ride roughshod over men."

Seriously? We're making it up about childbirth? You deliver a watermelon through your penis and call me back on this one ok?

"My own mother, a consultant anaesthetist herself, has always claimed that giving birth was a breeze but that she pretended it had been painful to build bargaining chips with my father."

Yeah things that can help ease the pain of childbirth part one: being a consultant anaesthetist. And why the hell did she need to build up bargaining chips? Couldn't she just do what she wanted or did your father have to issue permission first?

"You look at shows like Loose Women and you wonder how on earth they get away with the terrible things they say about men. I went on once and it was horrific. I wanted to die."

Well you had a bad experience. You would hope you would come away from it with a sympathy for women who go through something similar every time they go to work. Imagine being a camerawoman on Top Gear. Or a female co-presenter with Andy Gray. He'd probably make lecherous remarks asking you to help him adjust his microphone cable in his trousers...

"No male-hosted show could treat women the way those outsized harpies treat men."

(1) As we've seen, they can, and do. (2) What has size got to do with it? (3) Another word for your "watch every word" dictionary: harpie, noun, derogatory term for women.

"I don’t especially want to throw my hat in with Dominic Raab, the slightly bonkers Tory MP who has called for an end to legislative discrimination against men, but there is no question that women today have it all."

Oh yes we sure do - last I heard there were almost as many women in the cabinet as there are Magdalen College Oxford graduates. We've clearly made it. Release the party poppers...

"They retire younger and live longer to such an extent that minor inequalities in pay levels are obliterated when you consider whose money pays for those 25 years of retirement. And it just isn’t fair that they are allowed to be so vile about us."

Of course female poverty in old age is another area of inequality we haven't even talked about. Also bear in mind that the gender life expectancy gap is actually mostly down to lifestyle - to the fact that men drink and smoke more and eat less healthy diets.

"I suppose, in a way, British men are like white people were in Nineties South Africa or young Germans after the Second World War."

That seems unfair - white South Africans and younger German people seemed on the whole at least willing to admit and learn from the mistakes of the past.

"We are expected to go through a period of atonement for the sins of our fathers. To be treated worse than we merit because of crimes previously committed in our name: in this case the crime of feeding, protecting, loving and nurturing women in accordance with our biological imperative."

Who knew that "feeding" would involve so little cooking, "protecting" so very much murder, "loving" so much rape and "nurturing" so much direct discriminatory behaviour? And biological imperative? Don't make me laugh. Go and read Cordelia Fine, and come back when your top notch education has actually taught you something worth knowing.

"They don’t want that any more. They want to be linesmen. And so we have to let them tell us endlessly how they wish we were all dead."

Oh whoops ladies - apparently we now have to choose whether we want to be loved and nurtured or whether we want to be linesmen. And I know, I know, earlier on he said we could have it all but of course he didn't actually mean IT ALL, he meant, y'know either a partner or a career. Or neither if you like!

"If that’s not off-side, I don’t know what is."

Oh well let me explain. Offside is when there are less than two members of the defending team between yourself and the goal line at the time that the ball is passed. It doesn't apply to free kicks, corners and goal kicks or when you're in your own half or not interfering with play. Let me know if I can help you with anything else. For instance looking for that sense of decency...

Problems in the Drunk Tank

2011-01-19T03:52:00.004Z

This BBC report is about a centre in London that deals with people who've drunk too much in an attempt to ease the burden on hospitals. It's not entirely clear whether the point is that since symptoms are similar there's an efficiency improvement or whether it's just accepted these days that if you somehow "brought your illness on yourself"* you deserve substandard treatment. Looking at the "beds" - thin mattresses on the floor in mixed sex overcrowded rooms, I'd guess the latter.

In the video a male medic says that the women are "leaving themselves vulnerable to sexual or physical attack" and that such attacks "needn't have happened". He fails to use the phrase "men should stop attacking women who are drunk" or the phrase "we take all reports of sexual assault seriously regardless of how much the woman has drunk". Then a female medic says "they say 'I've been spiked' and I say - no, it's the alcohol". Surely what she should say is "we'll perform a full set of tests and store the results in case they're needed in a criminal prosecution"?

This is on Newsbeat by the way - aimed at young people. Hey kids! If you drink too much alcohol and get raped, it's your fault and if you don't drink too much (or even any) alcohol and get spiked and raped, we'll assume you drank too much alcohol and blame you anyway.

Talk about irresponsible journalism. Oh and irresponsible behaviour on the part of medical professionals too... Ugh.

*Footnote: not withstanding that alcohol addiction is an illness so it's not actually reasonable to blame people for suffering from it.

Big Opinions and Big Conversations

2011-01-17T00:25:00.003Z

So I was on The Big Questions again this morning. And it's up on iPlayer for the next 7 days if you want to watch it, click here. There's no particular bit to watch - I speak in all three debates.

I didn't get a chance to reply to some points though. I guess the biggest two are:

(1) "Islam's not a sexist religion, what do you know - you haven't read the Koran". Well firstly I have read quite a lot of the Koran but more to the point the people telling me Islam isn't sexist have also just said they would accept their husband having more than one wife but not accept a woman with several husbands. That's erm, what's the word, yes, sexist. And one of the people saying this is veiled to the point of only having her eyes visible - I have never seen a Muslim man dressed like this.

(2) "But as a feminist you must support these women converting to Islam because it's their 'choice'". No. I'm absolutely in favour of women having the right to make choices for themselves but only when they are able to do so on the basis of fair circumstances and true information.

The phrase "pro-choice" is used a lot when it comes to abortion - the right to choose what happens to your own body. But that's different when we're talking about a woman in China who has discovered she is pregnant with a girl in a family and culture where only a boy will do. She might be making that choice but it's not a choice made in fair circumstances. Similarly a vulnerable young woman who chooses not to terminate because a counsellor on a fake help line has told her to do so will give her breast cancer isn't acting on true information so again it's not a case of "her choice".

What we need to do is to take away the unfair circumstances and give women ready access to true information. Then their choice will be meaningful. But in the meantime we need to make sure women are not pushed into choices like this which can ruin their lives and leave them timidly peering out at what is left of their world through a tiny slit in a piece of fabric.

I had a very interesting message on the way home from a viewer: "I work for social services in mental health and I’ve seen a disturbing amount of converts (mostly female) to [Islam] I’m even working with the police as it would seem that there are radicals targeting people with mental health or people with a low IQ. I myself work with 4 people who have converted or are thinking about it. Any who I just wanted to say it’s great to see someone like yourself voicing there [their] opinions on national TV." Now that is both unsurprising and deeply deeply frightening.

This evening I did a much lighter piece on LBC about the British Comedy Awards and how Frankie "isn't Down's Syndrome hilarious" Boyle isn't even up for one or involved in the awards show. My conclusion was: great news, lets hope he stops it and/or goes away now. An on the other awards I'd like to give them to (from the nominees): David Mitchell, Jo Brand, Sarah Millican and Britain's best sitcom: Miranda! Love you all! You can listen to the show on the podcast from LBC but you have to register and I think pay money so I'll leave the link here - you have to follow the Richard Arnold show and today's episode is called 'Colin flying the flag' - but frankly if it's more than £2.50 I will cut you a deal and repeat my words verbatim over the phone for £2*!!

* Which would by the way be £2 more than my TBQ and LBC appearance fees combined, just for the next time someone says since they saw me on TV I must be super-rich!

Paleontologists Discover Evidence of Catherine Hakim's Evolutionary Line

2011-01-06T01:42:00.005Z

Text by me, artwork: Tristan Rogers.

The Police and The Streets

2011-01-05T23:23:00.002Z

Joan Smith has written an ace piece about exactly what Jeremy Vine and I were discussing earlier in the week with a total idiot (by which I mean one of the Daily Mail's finest writers).

Before I did the interview on BBC Radio Two I did another interview for an Iranian TV station about abortion (and no, I don't know where and when it's on, maybe someone will let me know when they see it). Between shootings I was chatting to the producer and she told me that the night before she had been walking home around half ten when a man approached her and asked for directions. She directed him but then noticed he didn't walk off in the direction she had advised him to go - he started following her instead. She tried doubling back on herself but he still followed. Now feeling rather stressed she spotted a branch of a gym open and went in to the reception. She could see the guy hanging around outside. She called the police and explained what was going on. They asked her where she lived and where she was then told her "it's only a few blocks, just go home". She explained again that she was being followed and didn't feel safe doing so. They told her they were busy and couldn't come and help her for at least an hour and a half to two hours. The gym closed 30 minutes later and she had no choice but to run home hoping he had given up and gone away.

What is the point of issuing warnings to women and not being prepared to respond when women heed these warnings and contact them for help?

Fresh Outlooks

2011-01-05T16:19:00.001Z

So the article I was interviewed for has been published here.

Questions About Catherine Hakim

2011-01-04T22:28:00.002Z

A journalist has just asked me to answer some questions about "Dr" Catherine Hakim and her forthcoming report about women in the workplace. [Spoiler alert: she thinks gender difference are all down to us hopeless women and our biological pre-destination for the kitchen and the scullery]

Anyway here is what I was asked and my answers - you may at some point see some of this quoted in an online paper called The Fresh Outlook.

What is your opinion on women's advancements in the workplace?

I think that women's advancement in the workplace is restricted by something called sexism. Reliable, tried and tested reports consistently show that it is discrimination, nothing else, at every level, that holds women back. The pay gap in this country is wide and shows little sign of narrowing at present.

Do you believe that equality has been achieved for women?

No, of course not. As a comedienne I am regularly told by promoters that they "simply" don't think women are funny. How can that be equality when my ability to do my job is pre-judged based on my gender? I battle daily to get half the work men around me get. I don't know a woman in any profession who hasn't been held back by sexism in some way at one time or another.

Do you think that women would like to marry a man who earns more than
them?

I think women are all different. I wouldn't dream of generalising like that. I think most people, men and women, can see advantages in marrying someone who has a lot of money. I think that's obvious. And given how tough it is for women to progress in the workplace it seems likely that this would encourage them to seek other means of securing their - and their families - future financially. I don't think seeking a rich partner means a person doesn't want to work or wouldn't prefer to earn their money themselves. It's a very practical choice.

Do you think women see their role as the primary carer of children in the
family?

Again some do and some don't. It would be weird, would it not, if women were all the same?And again those that do may do so because of what they sense as a biological urge, other may feel pressured to by society, family, and culture and others may do so because their workplace opportunities are so poor, they decide to focus their efforts elsewhere - or of course a combination of those reasons and others.

Further comment: This report has yet to be actually published so far as I can see. "Dr" Catherine Hakim is a terrible researcher. Last year she published a similarly misogynist report entitled "Erotic Capital" which I read and it's methodology was laughable. She quoted the book Belle De Jour as a key source without questioning it's veracity and made a series of bizarre and contradictory statements. That she is accepted by the academic elite serves only to highlight the entrenched and unquestioning sexism which permeates academia. That her "reports" are quoted as fact in every major newspaper before publication and peer review serves in turn to show the entrenched misogyny in the media. Only last year Cordelia Fine published a whole book (Delusions of Gender) debunking the "gender as innate" myths with painstaking, incontrovertible research and in a fun and easily readable way - it received little to no coverage. Personally I think every woman in the country should be sent a copy of that book and should gather as one and slowly beat Catherine Hakim to death with it.*

*Not the official view of the F-Word (through whom the request came) or the feminist movement. The official view of me however.

Tidings of Little Comfort or Joy

2011-01-03T19:39:00.004Z

So Mr Cru and I went for a little walk today and on our way back a guy was putting up a sign above a doorway at the end of our road that says "Sauna open". I figured there is at least a one in a million chance that they're actually opening a sauna rather than a brothel so I went over to ask how much they charge for deep cleansing mud treatment and reflexology and, reassuringly, he ran away. I called the Met and they tell me they're going to send their "safer neighbourhoods" team round - oddly not the human trafficking squad but I suppose better than nothing, which is what I imagine they'll actually do. [Oh that's not fair - they might go round and ask for a price-list, perform some quality control...]

Daily Mail Special: Gay Man Writes Homophobic Column!

2010-12-30T23:49:00.011Z

Oh dear. This one should honestly come with it's own little paper sick bags. So time for a line-by-line.

"The Mail's ANDREW PIERCE is both adopted and gay. But that doesn't stop him saying... Why I'm repelled by Elton and his partner's grotesque selfishness "

Really? Are you Andrew? Is your best friend also black and has he granted to express permission to use the n-word? Sorry doesn't work like that. One of the things about equality is that even though you're both adopted and gay - you still might be a bigoted scumbag. Or worse - you could even be a columnist for the Daily Mail...

"The title of an infamous fly-on-the wall documentary made in 1997 about Sir Elton John was Tantrums And Tiaras. It tells you almost everything you need to know about this showbusiness diva."

It's a film. Made by a documentary maker (called David Furnish) - no-one thinks a documentary where he just pops out for milk and watches Midsummer Murders is going to make it to TV. At best it presents a tiny snapshot of his life and at worst it's essentially a carefully-planned publicity stunt.

"One minute he was flouncing off a tennis court in the south of France and demanding a private jet home because a fan had the temerity to greet him publicly."

Flouncing? Is that a homophobic word for "walking"? And he was upset, he left the tennis court and said he wanted to go home.

"The next he was threatening to walk out shortly before another sell-out concert. ‘I’m sick of these shows,’ he raged."

And is a pop star not allowed to hate their job once in a while and not be in the mood for it.

"The decision to become a father appears to be another grotesque act of selfishness from Sir Elton who, along with his partner David Furnish, has bought a baby son from a surrogate mother in California for a reputed £100,000"

How terrible - it would have been much better if the surrogate mother had received only £2.50 and a couple of signed albums... The last thing they should be doing is paying the medical bills and making sure she's comfortable during her pregnancy.

"In that film, Elton John came across as brilliantly talented — and deservedly so, for he is one of the most gifted musicians and performers of his generation."

You discovered he was a talented musician by watching a film? You are officially the least knowledgeable person on the subject of Elton John I have EVER encountered. There are rural herdsmen in sub-saharan Africa who know more about him than you do. So stop judging him.

"But he was also petulant, spoilt and selfish."

Well "spoilt" is really when someone else buys you things you haven't earned. Whatever your view of Elton you can't really deny he made his money himself.

"And it is this side of his character that came to mind when I read this week’s news that Sir Elton, 63, and his partner David Furnish, 48, have bought a baby son from a surrogate mother in California for a reputed £100,000."

Mmmm - so you heard a gay couple were starting a family and you immediately started to think about negative aspects of their personas? I think that's called prejudice. Well done.

"I have no doubt of the couple’s ‘overwhelming’ happiness and joy at the arrival of their son. I am quite certain that the child’s unorthodox parentage — he was born to an unidentified surrogate mother who had carried the child after being implanted with a donor egg from another mystery woman — will prove no barrier to the love the couple will lavish on him."

When you say "unidentified" and "mystery" you mean you don't know who they are don't you? I think David, Elton and when he's older, the child, will be fully aware of these people's identity. And anyway so bloody what?! There are plenty of awful uncaring "orthodox" parents - which incidentally is code for "had a fuck".

"Yet I can’t help feeling that his decision to become a father is another grotesque act of selfishness from Sir Elton, and that the child is a little Christmas bauble he and his partner have awarded themselves. How telling it is that he was born on Christmas Day."

What evidence do you have for this? One of the two partners once shouted at a documentary camera-man. How does this make them the new Fritzls?

"As far back as 2001 Sir Elton admitted that he was too old for fatherhood, He told the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet: ‘I have come to the conclusion that it is too late for me. Had it been 20 years ago, then I would definitely have done it. I don’t want to be 70 years old when my daughter turns 16.’"

Mmm and he changed his mind. He would be the first person ever. Also this decision was made by two people, not one. If might well be David Furnish who was keen to have a child.

"Yet he will now be 79, not 70, when his son turns 16."

Yes but David Furnish will be only 64. Maths alert!

"It was once his wish to adopt a child, rather than create his own, but can you imagine any respectable agency even contemplating placing a baby with a man who will be collecting his state pension in only 15 months time?"

Well how about one that had a lot of needy children and a shortage of loving homes to place them in. And if you really watched the whole of that film you might have figured out he probably won't need to collect his state pension.

"So why should he be allowed to buy one?"

He didn't just start bidding for them on ebaby.com... Surrogacy is a long and complicated process, to describe it as "buying a baby" makes it sound like a livestock market. What next: baby futures?

"Sir Elton once admitted that he was too busy for fatherhood and spent too much time travelling."

And you think we should ban anyone who says they're busy from becoming a parent? Is that it?

"Yet next month he embarks on a 26-date tour of the U.S. and Europe and is unlikely to take his turn on nappy duty. The happy couple will, as normal, host their Oscars party in Hollywood in February."

So parents shouldn't work or have parties? OK lets get that one into law shall we? And 26 days is less than a month.

"Perhaps Zachary Jackson Levon Furnish-John will make his first appearance on the red carpet."

Right exactly - for all we know Elton plans to spend time with the child during the tour too, he can certainly afford to have him with him if he wants.

"Let me make my position clear. I am a gay man and I believe same sex couples should be allowed to adopt or have their own children — although I think that in ideal circumstances a child should be brought up by a mother and father."

Not making yourself very clear here. Either you disapprove of same sex couples having children or you believe children should be brought up in settings which are not to your mind "ideal".

"I have two very good male friends who are in a civil partnership and have adopted a little girl. They will make wonderful parents not least because they are absolutely committed to each other, but also because one of them has given up his job to be a full-time parent."

So these are the new rules - one parent must stay home? And while Elton is touring is there any evidence that David won't be looking after the child? Or is it different rules for anyone you've seen a short film about and taken a dislike to?

"So what of Sir Elton? In many ways, he is to be admired. He has spent millions of pounds of his own money on his Aids foundation. He has successfully battled against drink and drug addiction."

Indeed, yet you're still judging him based on a brief documentary in which you thought he "flounced".

"The warm public reaction to his civil partnership with David Furnish underlined his status as one of Britain’s most popular singers. He still tops the charts after a career spanning four decades."

But we're just the great British public right? If we like someone we're idiots but if you decide to hate someone because of some aspect of their personal life that's ok?

"But he is also an ageing, pampered, self-indulgent millionaire — look at the absurd names he and Furnish have given the poor child, for heaven’s sake!"

The kid's called Zachary. It's a relatively common biblical name. In 2008 it was the 72nd most common boy's name in the UK. In fact it's ideal because names in the top ten can mean kids end up with three in their class at school.

"And it is the nagging suspicion that Elton — a man who is by nature an obsessive — has simply acquired a son to satisfy his latest fixation that I find repellent."

Well if his "fixation" was that he wanted a kid - what better reason to have one. What other reason is there for having a kid? Broken condom? Shortage of chimney-cleaning staff?

"Forget the media circus that will surround this poor little rich boy for the rest of his life."

Yes - and what's more Andrew - YOU'RE IT. You are the media circus. Leave them alone.

"What really disturbs me is the selfishness of a world where it’s apparently acceptable for women in their 60s to pay for expensive IVF or for superstars who, in a parody of consumerism, ‘buy’ children from African orphanages as they think the normal rules don’t apply to them."

And the "normal" rules are what exactly? No babies without unprotected sex? Those are dead stupid rules and in no way guarantee quality parenting.

"But those rules — honed over thousands of years — do matter."

On the contrary the idea of people who are not the direct biological parents raising a child has been around for ever. Adopting a child and having a child raised by more distant relatives (grandparents, aunts and uncles, etc) is as old as the hills.

"And Rule Number One is that, by and large, a child needs a loving mother and father."

A child needs one or more loving parents.

"Rule Number Two is that a child needs to know where he or she comes from and what their genetic identity is. Two stories in the Mail this week highlight these truths."

I'm not sure this child won't know their genetic identity? All we know is that YOU don't know it. And many adopted children decide not to trace their birth parents when the opportunity arrives, I've not seen any evidence to suggest that is a "rule".

"There was a survey published yesterday from the Prince’s Trust, which concluded that young men with no male role models in their lives, and women without a mother figure, are hugely disadvantaged in life."

Firstly we should bear in mind that many of the benefits of having two parents (who for obvious reasons are likely to be one male and one female) are financial. But also this kid has not one but TWO male role models in his life. So presumably he's better off than a lot of kids.

"Then there was the poignant story of Pat Fitzgerald who, wrapped in blankets with a dummy in her mouth, was abandoned on the steps of a Cardiff hotel when she was only five weeks old."

Hankies out...

"Now, 71 years after that act of unimaginable cruelty, Mrs Fitzgerald, in a desperate bid to fill the huge hole in her life, is trying to discover her true identity, even though she was brought up as an only child by devoted adoptive parents."

Right - but lots of adopted children don't feel the urge to do that.

"I ached when I read about the yawning chasm she still feels in her life even though she has four children of her own."

But do we know whether she wouldn't have felt a gaping chasm if she'd been raised by her biological parents? We'd probably want to look at a slightly wider survey than one woman.

"But then I know something of Mrs Fitzgerald’s agony. I was christened Patrick Connolly in Bristol and spent the first two years of my life in a Catholic orphanage in Cheltenham."

Oh and you've picked a single example that backs up your own personal experience. This theory just doesn't say "will pass peer review" to me.

"My birth mother — a single woman — used to visit, but there was no place then for a single mother and her son to be together in the harsh moral climate of Sixties Britain."

Yes and your paper is trying to return to that harsh moral climate with its continued attacks on single mothers and the benefits they need.

"My salvation came in the form of a working class married couple. They already had three of their own children, but very little money."

Having kids when you've not got much money - the Daily Mail hates that. See this story, now taken down from their website (hopefully for being obnoxious and ludicrous) but available on an archiving site..

"But they had lots of love to give and they travelled to the orphanage for two hours on the bus each weekend. I’m glad they came. They adopted me a couple of months later and I will always be profoundly grateful to them for their love and support."

Check the start of your own article you say you have no doubt Elton and David with "lavish" love on their child. I assume "lavish" is homophobic for "give".

"Today, I regard them as my real parents, but I would not be telling the truth if I didn’t admit that I still wonder about my birth mother and father."

Wondering isn't quite the same as feeling a gaping chasm as you claim Mrs Fitzgerald does. So no consistent experience.

"So imagine the demons that could plague Elton John’s little boy with his unconventional parentage. Apart from the surrogate mother carrying the egg of another woman, there’s the question of who’s the father."

Unlike you, this child will be raised by his biological father. So whatever demons he ends up with "why isn't my biological father raising me?" is off the list.

"Just what is Elton going to say to him when he’s a troubled 16-year-old and asks: ‘Daddy, where did I come from?’ Imagine the chasm in that boy’s life."

Well I'm guess Elton and David will, err, answer the question. Obviously lets not forget Elton will be 235 years old by then so maybe he'll just say "where's me biscuit?"... I mean seriously if you're going to criticise older parents - make the most of it!

"As an adopted gay man, I have no interest in having children of my own — although I don’t denigrate those who want to."

Yes you do - see every other line in this article.

"Let’s hope Elton John’s son gets the same chances that I had, which had nothing to do with money. My parents had little of that."

Are you actually claiming only the poor should have children? That's significantly out of line with your paper's editorial policy...

"What they offered instead was the love and support of an ordinary, hard-working couple who were always there for their children."

Well if they were always there - they weren't as hard-working as all that. You can't be in two places at once.

"How often will Sir Elton be there for his son?"

Well given his enormous wealth and propensity to demand what he wants when he wants it, even if it means walking away from fans and paid work, I'd have to say: as often as he wants to be.

Argh! Daily Mail Fail (as usual)

2010-12-30T09:09:00.004Z

And there was me thinking I wasn't angry enough for the day, thanks Daily Mail!

First up Giles Coren has written a relatively reasonable piece about the shortage of women in the comedy DVD charts. I agree with a fair few of his points although it is frustrating that he says that women comics "tend to avoid accusations of sexism because they don’t want to sound like they’re whingeing" and then doesn't bother to address the fact that the real problem might be, erm, sexism, or indeed uber-sexism to the point where a woman can't even mention the s-word without being criticised for it! Also - and I hope this is a failed attempt at humour - he says "the Christmas television schedule: endless male comedy and not so much as a snort from the girls, unless you count the last episode of Miranda." In what sense is Miranda Hart NOT a woman? Has there been a rule change? I have a vagina, am I still in?*

Anyway he says in the middle he generally find women funnier than men and goes on to rave about his regular co-star Sue Perkins and how hilarious she is. Yet somehow the Daily Mail saw fit to title this article "So why aren't there any FUNNY women comics any more?". which implies that there are hundreds of female comics out there being offered DVD deals and their own shows, but sadly they're all rubbish. But I can't find a stand-up DVD by a woman on sale right now. Releasing a DVD is a huge deal - it requires planning and marketing. It's not a case of writing some funny jokes and wandering round the circuit until someone offers you a deal - deals are done years in advance and then promotional tours organised, posters, TV and radio appearances... In Edinburgh this year one magazine gave my panel show 5 stars and John Bishop's solo show 2 stars. But he got the Wembley Stadium gigs and the DVD deal. What gives? It has to be systematic sexism that means no women are getting to produce stand-up DVDs. How can we be dismissing as rubbish a group of DVDs that DOESN'T EXIST. Doh!

Anyway it gets worse.

Isabelle Caro - the French model whose emaciated body was at one point used to highlight eating disorders - has died. And the Mail chooses to mention that she blamed her disorder on her "difficult childhood". They mention NO OTHER contributing factors to eating disorders.

Now... Read down the headlines on the right hand side of the page:

Look out Posh! Now Geri Halliwell makes her fashion design debut with her own swimwear range. And she modelled line for next.

Lose TWO INCHES of festive flab by tomorrow - and look svelte for New Year. Feeling bloated after the Christmas festivities? Help is at hand.

That's not going to help your diet! Michael McIntyre takes his lookalike sons out for lunch. Family outing to McDonalds.

"My husband says he'll divorce me if I get fat". While SAMANTHA BRICK was poorly with an upset tummy, Pascal kept reminding her that she'll be losing weight.

Elisabetta Canalis's bikini can't shore up much support as she emerges from the sea... revealing a little too much.

Beaming Kate Moss can't hide her excitement as she and Jamie Hince jet off for New Year's holiday. Couple heading for Phuket in Thailand.

Kourtney Kardashian reveals slimming secrets after beating her sisters in diet battle. She's lost 3st 2lb.

And nine of the photos down the side of the website feature women in revealing bikinis/beachwear. None of them with any visible "flab".

Isn't it time to quit the faux concern and admit the Daily Mail itself is part of the problem?

*Two footnotes here: (1) There are some women comics with big enough ovaries to point at sexism and go "oh look - it's sexism". See, erm, my solo show, my blog, my career, etc. (2) Yes there are some female acts who tend to get drowned out on panel shows. But women are not all alike, we're not a "genre" actually. If you have a panel show, and you want to look all liberal and modern and not like a douchbag, call me - I will be more than happy to interrupt all the guys, be hilarious and rip Frankie Boyle a new one, the only question is what shall we do AFTER lunch?

Column in Management Today

2010-12-21T18:51:00.006Z

I had a little column published in Management Today about me and the comedy circuit. It's part of a bigger article about the business of comedy and how money is made, etc. I am mostly excited about being cartoon-ised!! But if you click on it you get a bigger version and you can read what I wrote too.

When Is Prostitution Not Prostitution?

2010-12-19T17:43:00.004Z

This interview from the BBC with a woman who works as an "escort" - selling sex - makes for very uncomfortable viewing. But it also serves to highlight one of the big problems with finding solutions to the abuses and horrors of the industry.

First of all the woman being interviewed insists that she is not a prostitute (or prostituted woman as many survivors prefer to be known) but an escort. When asked what the difference is she explains that (1) she worked indoors on the streets and that (2) she didn't wear high boots. Later she describes being physically forced to have unprotected sex against her will. The interviewer (less than tactfully) suggests "that's rape" and she responds saying she didn't see it that way because she was paid.

Now evidently what is happening is that she is in deep deep denial of what she goes through. But this is totally unsurprising - people in unbearable situations develop multiple personalities issues to allow them to "be someone else" during the awful bits. We know that many rape victims convince themselves that what they have experienced isn't rape as a coping mechanism. Should we be surprised that victims of repeated systematic rape and other abuses use euphemistic language to help them survive their experiences?

And bear in mind the stigma attached to words like "prostitute" and "rape victim". While men who pay for sex and rapists are often hailed as hyper-masculine. My boxing gym still has Mike Tyson's face on the wall and Wayne Rooney still plays top flight football and appears with his glamourous "WAG" wife in magazines like "Hello".

We have to distinguish however between being respectful to those who have had traumatic experiences and wish to chose their own language to describe them and those who are in fact defending the "right" of abusers to carry on abusing.

How Women's Rights Could Actually Save The Planet

2010-12-18T01:10:00.002Z

Oh dear Peter Preston in The Guardian. Talk about missing the point!!

The thing is that YES - solving the problem of runaway climate change is dependent on limiting and reducing the population. But NO that doesn't mean adopting a China-style one child policy or running around like crazed eugenicists sterilising anyone without a degree. And it also doesn't mean doing away with child benefit. Because (surprise Peter!) child benefit is not paid to encourage people to have children. It's not a reproduction bribe. Who the hell would decide to raise a child for 18 years in return for £15 a week? It's paid to help parents afford to raise their children well. Once you've fed, clothed, housed, educated and entertained your child you're not necessarily going to have much change left to treat yourself to nights out and designer clothes...

But here's the good news. There are millions of women around the world and right here at home who desperately want to have less or no children, to have children later in life and to control their own fertility. Furthermore some of us crazy feminist types actually think it is their right to do so and to be given access to the tools and education to enable them to make those choices in their own lives. We call them reproductive rights.

Free access to and information about contraception - including condoms which also prevent the spread of HIV and other STDs - and abortion are basic rights that every woman should have. All we have to do is provide them.

Of course it's harder than it sounds. We're not up against "crazy" lefties insisting that benefits be made available to enable parents to afford basics for their children. We're not up against "polite" society's refusal to discuss legislation which would force limits and restrictions on women who wanted to have larger families. We're actually mostly up against religion. Organised religion has worked tirelessly to deny women access to contraception, abortion and even to basic sex education and information about how their bodies work and the options available to them to control their own fertility. Religions benefit from encouraging their adherents to have large families, and this plays straight into a huge patriarchal structure that has attempted for centuries to control women, treat them as breeding factories and keep them in the home raising the next generation of brainwashed disciples.

The planet has much to gain from limiting and reducing the population but the mechanism for this needn't be controlling women's fertility - it can be empowering them to control their own fertility.

Sleep Crime Rules

2010-12-16T02:13:00.004Z

Sad that this needs addressing, but it evidently does. If you commit a serious, violent crime but are found innocent because you "did it in your sleep" you are a risk to the public. Until you can demonstrate that medical science can cure you of your sleep criminality you need to remain under medical or police or prison care at all times, especially if you appear to be nodding off.

For some reason it is always men who commit these dream-attacks against women isn't it? The most recent is the murder of Christine Thomas. But we have had similar issues before with sleep-rape (of course check with Whoopi Goldberg, this is different from rape-rape...). James Bilton was cleared of three counts of sleep-rape while his reassuring medical team opined that only 1-2.5% of the population suffered from this condition. So we can all sleep easily knowing that only 1 in 40 guys are liable to rape you in the night and get off scott free. Shame he never bothered to sleep-check-for-consent first.

Well just so you know, I'm developing a dreadful condition where I sleep-take-revenge-for-crimes-committed-by-the-criminally-asleep. If you find me stood over you with a hand gun, I am probably having one of those buying-a-gun-on-the-street-and-shooting-you-in-the-head-dreams. Gosh will I be embarrassed when I wake up...

NEWSFLASH: Jody McIntyre 3 million times more articulate than news presenter

2010-12-11T16:52:00.000Z

Now this is how to do a great BBC News interview!

Outside the Man Box

2010-12-11T15:03:00.002Z

This is ace, you should watch it.

Remember Ladies...

2010-11-28T21:42:00.003Z

The Daily Mail today is advising Kate Middleton to never let William see her without make-up unless she's ill. Really? I mean I don't even know HOW you would do that - sleep in make-up? Then you will wake up with it all smudged across your face looking like the aftermath of some awful student binge-drinking session. Sleep in another room? Oh well THAT will help your marriage a great deal. Wait til he's a sleep then creep out, wake up before him and sneak out and apply? Then you will forever get less sleep than him which is a bit tiring and restrictive...

Daily Fail - Vote Now!

2010-11-24T21:58:00.003Z

Seriously - today's online poll in the Daily Mail is this:

Ha ha ha ha ha....

Sun, Sea and Sex Crimes

2010-11-11T02:29:00.004Z

Well I was away over the weekend doing a couple of gigs in Tenerife (yeah I know, tough life, but ex-pats deserve to be entertained too!). The highlight for me was the opportunity to bag a boat-trip from Puerta Colon and go out and watch pilot whales basking in the sun just a few metres away from me. The lowlight was at the show on Sunday night...

The compere's onstage, doing well, asks a guy at the front what he does for a living. He says "rapist". Now honestly I'm not that phased by this. People get nervous when a comedian speaks to them from the stage and it's not uncommon for them to wrongly think that saying something outrageous or unbelievable might be the best way to avoid embarrassment. [Hint: in general it's not - you're much better off to just tell the truth. Or if you really don't want to get picked on - say you work for a children's hospital charity, most comics don't want to make jokes about terminally ill children.] Anyway I figure he is trying (and failing) to impress his mates although I notice when the compere repeats it, he does a "power salute" to another guy in the room who returns it - I assume this is his "mate" who thinks his answer is "hilarious". The compere makes a joke along the lines of - that's not a job, you can't do that for a living... The show continues and I'm the first act on.

I tell this guy it is really weird that he seemed "proud" about the rapist remark. I say most guys would want to play that down. I say in fact even most rapists wouldn't really want to draw attention to it. And I make a joke suggesting the women at his table might want to move elsewhere. Then I figure he's been made an example of enough for saying something stupid and inappropriate in a bit of a panic. I get on with my set. Later he reveals he's Scottish and I refer to him as the McRapist. I finish my set, get a beer and go to sit at the back of the show and watch the next act. During the second act the guy comes up to me at the back of the room and grabs my hand to shake it. I'm expecting him to apologise or (people do this a lot) say "Ah, you got me, you did well" (to which "no, I got you, and it was incredibly easy, if I'd done well you'd be crying..."). Instead while still holding my hand firmly he looks me right in the eye and says "It's all true - I was convicted and all".

He is definitely not joking.

And he walks off.

And I can't really scream because it's the middle of the show and another act is performing and that would be incredibly unprofessional of me (though in retrospect I think unprofessionalism might have been more than justified at that point).

I find myself sitting there looking at my hand where he's just been touching me. I go in the kitchen and wash it several times. Eeeeew.

Now I understand the policy of once people have been convicted and (one hopes) served their time, needing to rehabilitate them into society. And given how low the conviction rate for rape is there's no doubt I've shaken hands with unconvicted rapists many times. But what the hell is going on when this guy is overtly publicly proud of having committed rape? Ick ick ick.

Marie Claire Loves Cru-blog

2010-11-04T23:31:00.003Z

How sweet - I'm featured in their December edition as one of their favourite blogs to read... You can see the page by clicking here. And if you've just arrived after reading Marie Claire then welcome. I'm a bit lower on make-up tips than them and a bit higher on the old vicious satirical feminism, but I think we'll get along just fine.

Actually since I have to wear make-up to work (onstage even guys usually wear make-up otherwise you end up looking really pale and ill) maybe I should give tips:

Translucent foundation to even out the skin and hide spots I've picked.

Dull-coloured blusher to fake a shadow under the cheek bones, little bit of highlighter on top.

Dark eyeshadow round the outside end of the eyes, lighter round the inside and really light white/cream up under the eyebrows.

Tons of mascara, just keep going.

That lipstick that comes with two tubes in a box and one is the colour and the other tube is the gloss. Only thing is this stuff is the devil to get off so extra-powerful remover needed.

Or better still get yourself a TV interview right before your show and then they'll do your make-up for you and probably do a really good job of it that you can just leave on.

Ok - maybe I should stick to satire and feminism...!

Daily Mail Woman of the Year Coverage

2010-11-02T14:09:00.002Z

Despite my interest in women's rights, the Harper's Bazaar Women of the Year awards are not something I pay much attention to. The fact that shoe designer Manolo Blahnik won one this year for designing shoes so uncomfortable some women have actually had toe amputations in order to wear them for me adds that aroma du patronising sham so highly prized in the fashion industry's attitude to women.

Could help noticing the Daily Fail coverage though... Apparently Yasmin Le Bon bade a terrible mistake by wearing a fur sash. "It's not a beauty pageant Yasmin!" apparently (so what the hell is Monolo Blahnik doing there?!) so Ms Le Bon was too dressed up for a serious event. Meanwhile a woman called Natalia Vodianova (it not being a beauty pageant, one assumes, it won't be full of models... She must work for Land Mine Action.... Oh no, hang on... She's a model) made a terrible mistake by showing up with unshaven legs. She won an award for being "Inspiration of the Year" - inspiration to what? Eating disorder sufferers? In fact I'd wager the most inspiring thing she's done all year is not bother shaving her legs. [Where's my award, I do that every week!]

So are you supposed to dress up or not for this event? Or is it just a case of "here comes a woman, lets criticise her appearance!". Hold on, check masthead, that'd be it...

And then to add insult to injury in the midst of this pathetic excuse to congratulate one another for the thrilling idea of sticking a few frills on a pair of shoes they have the nerve to give an award to Zaha Hadid - the incredible Iraqi architect. I hope she sends it back with F*** OFF written all over it.

Sweden Tour

2010-10-16T14:08:00.005+01:00

I'm on my way out to Sweden for some gigs. If you are out there or know people who are please let them know - would be great to see some friendly faces. Most of the shows I'm performing at are Swedish-language but obviously my bits will be in English and you're welcome to hang round the bar and ignore the rest if, like me, your Swedish isn't good enough to argue your way out of Ikea.

Sun 17th Oct

Tiny Comedy 7pm at Southside Pub

Big Ben 8pm on Folkungagatan

Tues 19th Oct

Komikaze at Sugar Bar on Kammakargatan

Weds 20th Oct

Skrattarå Comedy Club in Årsta

Thurs 21st Oct

Laughs at the Liffey in Gamla Stan

FLOPP 8pm at O'Leary's on Liljeholmstorget

Also any top tips about sightseeing in Stockholm or getting around much much appreciated!

Review: Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine

2010-10-16T01:59:00.004+01:00

Review of Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine.

Oh dear. Drain out the money-banks, you are going to need a lot of copies of this!

Stop me if you've heard this one before. You're chatting to a friend with kids and you mention being a feminist. They give you sage look that says "Hey I once had unprotected sex and now I'm an expert on humanity" and explain how despite the entirely gender-neutral upbringing their kids have had little Marlon Rambo and Rosie-Boobookins-Princess are just "hard-wired" to adopt traditional gender roles. Well great news, starting now you can respond by simply pushing this book into their hands, muttering "hang on in there" to the kids and walking away.

And while she's on the subject Fine also neatly does away with the raft of Men - Mars, Women - Snickers and Why Women Should Try Shutting Up And Following Orders-type books that seem to have become so utterly commonplace recently. Admittedly in debunking this nonscience she does have to go into a fair amount of heavy-going methodology but she does a careful job and keeps it humourous and interesting throughout.

And to top it off she also takes care of indirect unintentional discrimination. The manner in which people make subconscious sexist decisions and then justify them to themselves in non-sexist ways. "I'd hire him because he's more _________* than her" *insert any old rubbish here.

One side effect of the book has to be looking back through my own life at times when I've missed out on promotion or work I wanted and was well qualified for. Only a few weeks ago I was talking with someone who runs a high profile comedy show which I would be ideal for. I emailed my CV and demo reel over in advance and then in person suggested he should consider auditioning me for the show. He laughed like a drain. Like it was the funniest thing he'd ever heard. And that's exactly it. If you asked him if he was sexist he'd be horrified and insist he wasn't but he doesn't regard me as a serious performer despite the fact that I'm undoubtedly better at it than most of the people (men) he does use. If I had a penis he might tell me he wasn't hiring right now but he wouldn't find it quite so hilarious.

So you should read this book as an eye-opener on your own life. You should also keep a couple of spare copies about your person for throwing at idiot parents and anyone who thinks the shortage of female Nobel prize winners is something to do with rotating three dimensional objects rather than raging sexism. Delusions of Gender is really important, much-needed and should be compulsory reading for parents, educators, employers and politicians. Well written and convincing. Just great.