The day the Steel Band came to town, then left again...

I've been meaning to write about exception reporting for a while now. It came out of a lunch where I felt as though I was completely out of touch with reality and it made me think about why that was. Given some time to consider it I've concluded that it was the grand statements of 'fact' I was listening to that I found so unpalatable.

I blame the exception reporting we are subjected to disguised as 'news' or 'factual reporting.' If you were to believe the media reports you'd have a pretty low opinion of humanity. Using the grossest examples of indecency or violence or corruption to extrapolate that this is what we are as humans just doesn't make sense. It's lazy and it's inaccurate, but when people are scared and fed up and in debt it's what they are willing to believe to make sense of their own discontent. 

To counteract this idiotic approach here is my much-needed reality check:

• Not all benefits claimants are scroungers. Some are people who work zero hours contracts and don't earn enough to live on. That's a normal living, not a moat or duck house living. 

• Not everyone who works in a bank is overpaid or wealthy. The vast majority of bank staff do not earn six figure sums or earn massive bonuses. A few do.  

• Not all immigrants are criminals and ne'er do wells who are just 'over here' to steal jobs, money and housing. 

I wish I could challenge the notion that not everyone in UKIP is a racist or sexist, but I do struggle to find any proof to support that assertion. Here are a few reasons why: 

Yesterday my lovely friend Tim tweeted that UKIP were planning a 'mini carnival' in Croydon to address accusations that they are a racist party. I live in Croydon and Tim used to so I said I'd go along - even though I had some hardcore TV watching planned yesterday afternoon - to see what was going on. UKIP had invited along all the BME candidates standing for them in the local area - because they're not racists - and booked a steel band - still not racists ok? In the end it was a fiasco and I'm glad I chose to stay indoors as by all accounts it all got a bit ugly out there.

I have to take issue with how much attention Farage and his party get considering they have precisely no MPs. Yes, I'll say that again - they have not one MP. And yet Farage has been on Question time more than any actual politician and continues to be invited to the table despite having no real political mandate. Last month there was a lot of comment about whether or not UKIP would stand in the Newark by-election as if that was of any relevance at all. It was a complete waste of time. Instead of asking why the party is so welcoming to candidates who clearly have no internal monologue or external moderator the media is asking why they aren't going into 'real politics.' Then there was the James O'Brien interview on LBC. If you haven't seen it please take the time to watch it now - it's ok I'll wait...

I know. I know. Close your mouth and keep reading.

Farage is invited to participate in TV debates with other party leaders despite the fact that his party has precisely one idea. Now that is exception reporting taken to it's illogical extreme. UKIP are the exception in British politics. They are a party that has no MPs and yet they are invited to participate alongside parties with real policies (however insane or mundane) and are taken seriously when they openly state they have no interest on anything outside the one issue they stand for.

We have received a mountain of electioneering material in the post from all the parties and UKIP sent me a letter. It was actually addressed to me !! Did they not realise that with the middle name Kaur I would probably disagree with their hostile and openly racist policies ?  Oh hang on they don't actually have any policies do they ? Farage spends more time expelling the 'random elements' in his party than he does talking about what they believe in outside the one big idea.

This is why you have to go out and use your vote on May 22nd. Not just because so many people around the world (mostly women) are still denied the right to vote. It is precisely because so many people don't vote that the same old same old keeps happening. If you are someone who doesn't vote and says, 'It makes no difference, what's the point anyway ?' then you are part of the problem. You are the reason the same people keep making the laws and getting away with the self-serving decisions you disagree with. Sitting in your kitchen moaning to your friends that it's all such a waste of time really is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

We get the Government we deserve and even if you have no opinion about the local or european elections use this chance to flex your voting muscles. Get in some practice before the general election so that when it comes around you're ready for it. Even if you're not registered to vote for this one, pop down to the polling station and see how it all works. I took my son with me the last time I voted and there was not one other voter there - I like to think that my vote counted for even more.

So even if you vote for a party I don't agree with, it genuinely is more important that you just do it anyway. What matters is that you use your vote and that is is counted.

Now that really would be exceptional.

Get your vote on !

Rock-a-bye-baby in the puff pocket

At night just before my son goes to sleep we have a ritual he calls 'little baby in the chair' where he lies in my arms like he did when he was a baby. We sit in the chair I used to feed him in (which is the story chair now) and we talk about our day. He starts with "I had a nice time at nursery" - every day, even when he hasn't been to nursery and if there are any 'issues' to discuss we talk about them.

On Monday there was an incident at nursery where he pushed his friend Finlay so I talked to him about this and explained why it isn't nice to hit our friends. It seemed to do the trick as the next day when Hubbie went to pick him up he got an exemplary report on his behaviour. I have also found this bedtime chat helpful in the past when he's been fussy about food at nursery or seemed upset about something.

The bedtime ritual is ever evolving as he grows and the newest addition is where we talk about things that happened when he was a baby. He loves to see photos of his baby self and will ask to watch videos of himself over and over again. This week I told him about when we were in the hospital for the first few days after he was born and he used to fall asleep lying on my chest. He smiled at the thought of falling asleep on Mummy and it was a lovely way to say goodnight to have a cuddle 'like we did when you were a baby.'

Telling him stories about when he was a baby also makes me and Hubbie revisit memories of the early days. In particular Hubbie remembered how on the first night we came home he spent what felt like hours trying to get our newborn baby boy to sleep. He tried everything and was exhausted himself so when he finally succeeded he panicked that something was wrong and woke the baby up to make he sure he was still breathing.

Most new parents have similar experiences of sleep deprived madness - I referred to our boy as 'her' a few times, but was far too tired to correct myself. In my half awake, half asleep stupor just being able to function was a miracle. I perfected the zombie walk of the sleep deprived new parent. You see it in cafes, on public transport and in soft play centres everywhere. We're all just doing what we can to get through the day and night with this person we adore and who we would do anything for, but who doesn't respect our need for sleep or personal space.

So, it's with dismay that I heard earlier this week that according to new research co-sleeping with your baby increases the risk of sudden infant death syndrome or cot death. A lot of parents co-sleep because they want to bond with their baby and it does make breastfeeding on demand easier. When my baby son was next to me I never fully slept anyway as I was so aware that he was there. We didn't put him in the bed, but on top of our duvet in a creation of Hubbie's making he christened the 'puff pocket.' This was a snuggly sleep space just for the baby fashioned into a sort of papoose that meant he was warm, but separate. I can't recall moving at all never mind rolling anywhere near him and spent a lot of time just watching him sleep and listening to him breathe. Now he is in his own room I still go in during the night and check my son is breathing - every night. It is no hardship for me and it reassures me that he is fine.

Fear of sudden infant death is so paramount for already frightened new parents that anything that's identified as a risk factor will cause them to be on high alert. I just wish that advice for new parents was presented in a kinder and more helpful manner. I remember how scary it is being responsible for this tiny person for the first time. If only every other news story didn't make me want to cry or hide my child indoors for the rest of his life.

I never drank the milk anyway, but that's not the point.

A couple of things discombobulated me today. Firstly it appears that the misguided clothing style from my teens has been appropriated into a 'revival' so I saw almost my entire wardrobe from when I was 18 in the shops this afternoon. It was disturbing to say the least seeing bold prints, bad trousers and (heaven forfend) bodies on sale again. As a wise woman once said, "if you're old enough to remember it from the first time it was in fashion you're far too old to wear it this time."

Secondly I was just about to go on air this afternoon and present my radio show, which today I'd subtitled "Spring Fling' in homage to a ball that they used to hold at my university. [For younger readers a ball was what you now call a prom] As I waited for my fellow presenter to wrap up her show I looked at twitter and saw this:

So my plans for a cheery and light hearted show with some fun tunes was suddenly threatened as I saw the steady stream of vitriolic and abusive messages with links to anti-Thatcher songs on social media. It was tempting to go with a show about the news, but it would also be out of step with my usual style so instead I just didn't mention it on air at all.

Instead I played music from my years at Uni as that era was fresh in my mind and they just happened to be songs that typify the Thatcher years as PM. In fact she once visited the campus as the University of Warwick was her favourite example of enterprise in further education. She arrived in a helicopter and a student - who is now communications manager for a local authority in East London that rhymes with Hower Tamlets - threw eggs at her. He wasn't doing a degree in PE so of course he missed. 

In the interests of full disclosure I hated Thatcher with a passion. So much so that I was actually angry at Meryl Streep for portraying her sympathetically in The Iron Lady. In my dating days I went out with a man who had her photograph in his upstairs bathroom and I was so horrified that he would do that (even for a joke) that in my head I already knew it was over. 

I grew up in a house where if she was on the TV my Dad would swear and change the channel. It was ingrained in us as children to hate her and to this day the sound of her voice makes me shudder. In my youth it was all the rage to call her a milk snatcher and Spitting Image portrayed her as an increasingly masculine character over the years ending with her smoking stogies and wearing a pinstripe suit. 

Now considering that on twitter I mostly follow people who hold similar views to me it's unlikely that I'd have seen any heart felt tributes to her, but I do have friends whose politics are very different from mine. It makes certain conversations difficult, but I have always been honest about how I feel about Thatch and the myth that she was a powerful force for women and feminism. 

I'm not celebrating or finding joy in her death. Not because of any mawkish sentimentality about her being an old woman you understand. She died peacefully in old age, in the comfort of the Ritz hotel and not in poverty or disablement. How very similar to her good friend Pinochet. 

So today while others are going apoplectic with rage at her past deeds and others are calling for a rational and measured response to her being accorded a ceremonial (not State) funeral I am celebrating something different. 

On Friday I went to a job interview after being a stay at home parent for most of my son's life so far. I wasn't sure if my suit would fit (it did) or if I would know what to say (I did) or if they would even offer it to me (they did). Now the hard part. I've asked them to consider part time hours so that I can still care for my son a few days a week. The salary does not cover full time childcare and I'm sure they could use the cost saving of part time hours as they are a charity. I find out their decision tomorrow, but if they don't go for my suggestion it's nice to know I can still get a job in these austere times.

So today is not about her, it's all about me.

Just the way it should be :o)  

And now for something a bit serious

There were two news stories that I took particular interest in this week and I wanted to share some thoughts on them.

The first was a news item about the arrest of nine men from Rochdale and Oldham who had been involved in systematic grooming and sexual abuse of young girls. Comment and opinion has come from quarters as diverse as the BNP and the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Interestingly enough they seem to be saying about the same thing - that race is a factor as 8 of the men are Pakistani and one is from Afganistan. The assertion has been that they targeted white girls due to cultural attitudes towards sexuality. This completely ignores the fact that abuse is abuse regardless of the ethnicity of the victim or perpetrator. It also turns a blind eye to the abuse that takes place within the Asian community (which is the catch-all term being used to describe these men) and goes unspoken about. Additionally there is the practice of underage marriage which pretty much sanctions child abuse and is more common than we are led to believe. To make this about race is unnecessary as it takes away from the reality that these are horrific and cruel acts committed by nasty people. In communities where it is the custom to call all adults uncle and aunty and to show respect to them a child can be placed in a vulnerable situation and not feel able to report it to anyone. Targeting complete strangers and luring them into a dangerous situation is downright criminal and thankfully these men have been caught and charged. Don't even get me started on how unhelpful Trevor Phillips' comments are - just read them and decide for yourself: http: BBC News website

The other news item playing out towards the end of this week was the cover of Time magazine to illustrate an article about attachment parenting. In case you haven't seen it this is the photo:

The various debates on radio and online have included spokespeople from Mumsnet and other parenting organisations. All of them commenting on the pose of the photograph and not the article itself. What was a piece about attachment parenting has become outrage at a woman defiantly appearing to breastfeed a child who can stand and look at the camera. Not for them the traditional babe in arms pose we are used to seeing (or not as the case may be). The various threads of discussion I've followed have been about whether or not prolonged breastfeeding is about the child or the mother. I breastfed my son and wanted to do so for as long as it suited him. Eventually at 14 months I had to concede that he wasn't really feeding any more and it was about me wanting to hold him close and keep the bond we had developed. When he was first born and we were in hospital for a few days I fed him for hours at a time and holding him close was just the most wonderful sensation. Being able to let go of that closeness is difficult, but I have noticed that as he grows he chooses how to be close to me and this autonomy and independence is important. It has always been important that my son feels close to both me and Hubbie and they also have a very affectionate relationship. Being able to breastfeed is a wonderful way to build a bond with your child and one I'd recommend to anyone. However, it isn't always possible for a mother to breastfeed and it isn't an option for the father so attachment comes in many other forms. The magic 2 year goal for breastfeeding is taken from the World Health Organisation guidance to women in the whole world. It is the safest, most hygienic and cheapest option for mothers of babies born in countries where water is not clean or accessible and where healthcare is not freely available. However, in a culture where we have the choice it is the tyranny of the 'Mummy mafia' that makes breastfeeding for years the gold standard of caring. If I sought validation from the Supermums I'd have serious concerns about my own sanity.

Next time: back to usual light-hearted self deprecating schtick I promise :o)

My fair lady ( Oh wouldn't it be luvverly ?)

In the last two days I've been following two news stories that show how important we feel it is to be fair. In the case of an LA fitness gym insisting on a couple paying their 2 year membership despite them being close to destitute there was outrage on Twitter. In the end for fear of further opprobrium the gym chain climbed down and waived the contractual arrangement. Cue hand wringing and wailing and gnashing of teeth over how hideous the contracts are when we all know that it's people paying up front and not using the gym that renders profit and enables people like me to have so many free trial sessions.

The other story being played out today on local news radio is that babies will need paid for tickets to attend Olympic events. The last I heard they were reconsidering this as various Mummy websites and even the (mostly useless) equality and human rights commission suggested there might be a case for claiming sex discrimination if a mother taking a child to the games was required to pay for that child. I bought tickets to some events and at the time had no idea I was also expected to buy tickets for my son. There is no question of him not coming with us. How can I not take him to a once in a lifetime event taking place in his own home town ?  Mumsnet and Netmums - for all the pointless meandering tub thumping about mini dramas that affect their precious little Avi-Mays and Ocean-Blues - do stand up for the things that they believe to be fair.

My own issue with fairness is one that causes people to look away muttering in almost complete disgust. I am the person who does the unthinkable. I check the bill at the end of the meal and work out what everyone owes in order to be fair to all - it's not popular and it's completely unEnglish. I have a strong opinion about why it is important to do this and there are two meals in particular that have caused me to become the human calculator and social pariah.

Firstly when I was a student I didn't have a lot of money, but I did work during holidays and even during term time to finance my way through my degree studies. I still met up with friends who I had worked with in my Saturday job at a library and at one particular Christmas meal I ordered one course - the cheapest dish - and one soft drink as I knew I didn't have the means to splash out. The senior librarians ordered massive sharing starters, expensive main courses and puddings, wine and coffees. When the bill came they split it 5 ways and I didn't want to make a fuss so I ended up subsidising their meals by paying well over the £10 that my meal had actually cost.

The second time was when a friend chose a reasonably priced venue for his 30th birthday which was offering a three course menu for £16. Me and hubbie went along and the other diners had already been drinking before we arrived. They had ordered champagne for the birthday boy (very generous we thought) and they also thought it would be a wheeze to order him some shots - after all you only turn 30 once don't you ? When the bill came it was carved up and we were told we owed £45. I questioned how this was so when I hadn't had any alcohol and hubbie had one beer and our food was only £16. A recalculation was done and we were still ordered to part with £30 each. That means my cup of tea and hubbie's beer cost £14 each.

I vowed from then on to not be taken advantage of again when other 'friends' decide to be generous with my money.

This was tested when I was on a skiing holiday with some friends in Whistler and we went out for dinner with a couple we didn't know very well, but who seemed nice enough. He wanted to order a particular bottle of red wine and we said that was fine, but we didn't want any. When the bottle came he insisted we try it which we politely did. So when he divided the bill up for us all to pay I said that wasn't fair as one of us had only eaten soup and the others hadn't ordered the wine. We paid for what we had eaten and included a tip. The correct money in the dish we all got ready to leave and he again asked us for money for a tip which we explained to him we'd already included. He had expected us to subsidise his choice of wine and we were pretty clear that wasn't going to happen.

I don't think twice about challenging bill payments now as I think I'm old enough not to care if someone is offended by me saying I'll only pay what I owe. We're all on a budget these days so if you want to splash out pay for yourself - it's only fair.

Fairness is a simple concept and one that in principle we all agree with. It's just that some people think it's only fair to take advantage of others. It's a small stand to say no I won't pay for your dinner, or your extravagance in wine or cocktails, but it's a start.

Oh and I'm taking my son to the Olympic games whatever Seb Coe says - and so there !

Bully for you

A you tube video of Asyraf Haziq - the Malaysian student who was mugged following an attack that left him with a broken jaw - became news last week. I don't need to see people being cruel to know that it happens and to be shocked by it. What followed was a flood of sympathy and support for him as the innocent in the chaos of rioting who became caught up in events that he had no involvement in. It made me angry and it left me feeling sick about the mentality of those who not only beat him up initially, but those who then robbed him. It wasn't just criminal, it was old fashioned bullying. 

Then yesterday there was a news report claiming that a third of teachers have been bullied online by parents using facebook. Cyberbullying - as it's being called - is just the most recent development in an age old form of abuse that I've recently had a smidgen of experience of. Whether at school or at work or even at home being bullied has at various times just been a part of my everyday life. After a while it's just how life is and goes some way to explaining why I get so angry about what I see as injustice and unfairness.

It fascinates me what drives some to bully and others to be the ones who are bullied. I've often heard people say that bullies are victims themselves. I'm afraid I can't concur. As someone who has been on the receiving end of bullying at many different stages in life I don't think I've visited it on others as a result. It does make me wonder if some of us are predisposed to being bullied either by virtue of what we look like or how we respond to bullies. I can't recall a time when I've actually confronted a bully, so maybe that and my desperation to be liked makes it easy for them ? 

Of course this doesn't explain why pick on someone who is already bleeding or a person who is doing their job and you just don't like them or what they say. I do wonder what became of the girls who bullied me at school. Did walking behind me in the playground and pushing me or stealing my school bag lead to a fulfilling adult life or are they as pointless now as they were back then ? It's probably all coming back to me because I'm traumatised at the thought of sending my son to a nursery. I know that this is the beginning of leaving him to find his way with other children and he has to learn to be independent and to stand up for himself. I just wish that I didn't keep finding evidence the people can be really nasty and they don't need a reason. 

An obituary for Croydon

This morning I took a bus into town and saw a bike shop with windows smashed and Richer Sounds boarded up. It was so close that last night me and hubbie literally sat in the front room fully dressed until 3.30 am in case we needed to get our family out of Croydon to safety.

The last time I was this terrified it was 1977 and the National Front were marching past our family home  - the flat above my parents shop (yes it was on the corner - ha ha very funny). At that time I had no idea why they were marching or who they were, just that my parents had closed up the shop and were peering through the closed curtains. No one should ever see their family this frightened.

I relived that memory today as I felt sick, scared and disbelieving. I don't know what the appropriate response is to feeling afraid that your family might get hurt, but one person (who is abroad right now) kept referring to other people she'd spoken to being 'level-headed' about it. I guess being in another country and watching news footage doesn't automatically make us all experts in empathy.

This afternoon the police issued photos of people who broke into the large retail stores on Purley Way and other stores that have CCTV. The fact that they so blatantly disregarded any need for disguise shows either supreme arrogance or a belief that there will be no consequences for their actions. I sincerely hope they are wrong.

The sordid case of life imitating art...

You know how the saying goes 'there is a novel inside all of us' ? Well, a few years ago - with some prompting - I decided to unleash that novel. It was a vanity project really as I was convinced that my wit and intelligence would light up the pages and it would be a runaway success. Instead I laboured over this work and found that the characters took on a life of their own and at times I really struggled to find 'their voices.' It wasn't as simple as it seemed when I narrated possible chapters in my head while cleaning or running. Once in front of the screen all my genius prose dried up and I was left with clunky paragraphs that didn't really follow on from each other. I asked a friend to read it and he was nice about it, but I didn't submit it to anyone as it was never finished and I wasn't sure it would be of interest to anyone else. This was about ten years ago.

Then my life started to resemble events in my novel. Things my protagonist did or said which I'd forgotten writing about happened in my life and I wasn't sure whether I was subconsciously channelling the character I'd written or it was just unfortunate coincidence. Then recently I watched a Channel 4 Dispatches programme about the murder of Anni Dewani (Hindocha) in South Africa on her honeymoon. I realised that her name was the same as my character (and the same spelling) and there were startling similarities in her story with the exception that my character wasn't murdered, but left for dead at the beginning of the novel. It was so chilling I decided that in the interests of public safety the novel inside me is best left unwritten !!

"Rebekah, you're fired !" Go on Rupes, grow a pair and do it !!

That News Corp have withdrawn from the bidding process for BSkyB was nothing like as unexpected as the rapid closure of the NOTW.  What is surprising is that someone as egotisical as Rupert (Montgomery Burns) Murdoch has actually jumped before being pushed. His continued faith in Rebekah Brooks (nee Wade) and the blatant disregard with which he sacked people who had nothing to do with the phone hacking paint the picture of a Randolph Hearst character (albeit a less portly depiction than the one Orson Welles made infamous). The political rats throwing themselves over the side rather than admit to having made nice with the Murdoch empire only serve to prove how absolute power corrupts absolutely (to paraphrase). Not one of the main parties comes out of this clean.

Why anyone is in any way surprised that it wasn't just movie stars and John Prescott who were hacked is a mystery. Does anyone truly believe that newspapers write actual news ? Years ago I knew a woman who went on to become Paul Merton's second wife. At the time she had started seeing him her soon-to-be-ex-boyfriend was doorstopped by the NOTW and asked if he knew that she was having an affair. She found out who had told them as the person had all new furniture paid for by the snooping hacks.

We've known for years that the famous can expect their rubbish to be rifled through and 'sources close to' often means the person's own PR. It isn't exactly a massive leap of faith to see that with the growth of mobile communication it was going to be the next source of information. Private conversations and personal information being made public has led to suspicion being laid at the wrong door and innocent people being sacked (eg. personal assistants to famous folk).

My father-in-law refuses to own a mobile phone and is highly critical of what appears to be an over-reliance on them. He is giddy with schadenfreude over this story as he sees it as proof that nothing good can come of being so available. He reads the Daily Mail so I'm waiting to hear where he thinks they get their 'facts' from.