There is enormous pride that comes with being a Lionesses player. And pressure, too.

Under Sarina Wiegman, our team went up a level and in 2022 we won the European Championship on home soil, a wonderful achievement but one which means we have had to live up to that since.

It’s been quite difficult for a few years but we feel we have now drawn a line under that.

Last time out we beat world champions Spain 1-0 at Wembley in the Nations League. The performance was a reset, with so many players going back to basics. The outside world might sometimes see us as good individuals but that night in February we played together as a team.

It was a big victory and one which we believe puts us on a good path to the defence of our European Championship title in Switzerland this summer. But we cannot just expect it to happen because we’re England and we won the trophy last time.

The same thing that happened to us after winning the Euros also happened to Spain – albeit it may not have been as well-publicised in this country as it was over there.

Spain really struggled for results for a while in the aftermath of beating us in the 2023 World Cup final. Of course, it can happen and you have a target on your backs as the winners. Opponents will up their game against you which, to be fair, has always happened when you play for England.

You find your level eventually and we’re a new England team now, in terms of personnel too.

You don’t need to shout about being the reigning champions. You don’t get given anything when you start playing again after winning silverware, whether you’re England, Spain or anybody else. That comes with the territory.

There’s that perception something changes when you’re the holders but look at the team we have now – there’s no Ellen White, for example, who started every match for us at the Euros. Others have moved on too. This is a different side.

Spain didn’t have one of their World Cup star players, Alexia Putellas, against us in that recent meeting but they did have players like Laia Aleixandri, who did not feature in their World Cup success. There are always good players in top sides who you have to look out for. It’s just that you can’t win every time, even if you’re world champions like Spain.

For us, I’m very proud of what we achieved three years ago but, as I have said previously, the England shirt can weigh heavily at times.

I think it can be especially hard if you are a young player coming into a team with that ‘reigning champions’ tag. The pressure is a lot.

You win a trophy, there’s that excitement and then the pressure grows to beat everybody. You look at younger players who have subsequently come into our team and made their debuts in front of huge crowds at Wembley Stadium. I try, as one of the senior players, to help 
them acclimatise to what our world is like now.

Through this, I’ve developed great relationships with midfielders Grace Clinton and Jess Park – who scored the winner against Spain – two young players I hadn’t really played with before. They ask me a lot of questions in training and I try to offer advice where I can.

With Jess, I’ve simply told her she is a very good player who is in the squad on merit and that she doesn’t need me to tell her how to play football. It’s true, these young players are good enough in their own right already.

All I can hope is that the youngsters learn to handle the expectation that comes with being an England player now. I’m sure they can but I am also sure it isn’t easy.

Things have changed for us and we have to allow this group of players to find their own way as we return to action this week with a Nations League double-header against Belgium – in Bristol on Friday, and in Leuven next Tuesday.

We might be the reigning European champions but this team is better off without the added pressure that label can bring. From now on, we just need to focus on what’s ahead.

As a British, female-led brand, ALIGNE are proud to be partnering with Lucy Bronze as we champion women in sport. Female athletes are the epitome of confidence and strength and Lucy represents everything ALIGNE stands for.

MORE: Gabby Logan joins star-studded hosting line-up for 2025 Women’s Football Awards

MORE: Nominations open for the 2025 Women’s Football Awards

MORE: Gay Russian tennis star ‘didn’t have much choice’ over Australian nationality switch

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.

Mental health isn’t a ‘snowflake’ problem – it affects everyone

‘A few older people are devoid of empathy’
I’m a member of Gen Z and one of many who is in gainful employment while suffering mental health issues.

I wonder where that leaves me in Atticus’ narrow-minded assessment of my generation. Unlike him, I recognise that many people of all generations have mental afflictions worse than mine and are unable to work.

His diatribe is emblematic of the sad fact quite a few older people are devoid of empathy. Ash, Derby

Sitting in silence on a train is not a crime

‘Being on a train without doing anything does not make me weird’
I thought the article about podcaster Curtis Morton ostracising people for just sitting on a train minding their own business (Metro.co.uk, Mar 31) must have been for April Fool’s Day.

Criticising someone who gets on a train and sits quietly without having to use a phone, read a book, have earphones on etc is ludicrous and giving them a name like ‘barebackers’ is horrible.

Just because I sit on a train without doing any of the above does not make me weird and the fact you insinuated such in an article may make people target me and other people like me. Corin, London

Is climate action a luxury we can’t afford in a world on the brink?

‘Flowers later!’
We need more oil and gas from the North Sea as a form of national security, yet John Woodhouse (MetroTalk, Mon) opposes this ‘scaremongering’, saying, ‘We have to cut down on fossil fuels to reach net zero.’

What’s the point of net zero when there’s a looming war in Europe? During World War II, Brits even replaced their flowerbeds with vegetable crops as the country needed more food. Flowers later! Alf, London

Just Stop Oil stop campaigning

‘on behalf of everyone – thank you.’
To the activists of Just Stop Oil, who say they will end their campaigns this month (Metro, Fri), and on behalf of everyone – thank you.

Thank you for doing what the rest of 
us couldn’t.

For standing up for what is right in the face of overwhelming power.

For sacrificing so much to protect the futures of all species on Earth.

For raising awareness of the existential threat of climate collapse, to expose corruption and to inspire others.

And thank you for showing our craven leaders that we are not giving up our planet without a fight. What we’ve seen is only the beginning. Helen Shaw, Liverpool

Click here to order a print or call 0191 6030178

It’s funny which bits of the Constitution are taken seriously in America.

When a young Ruth Bader Ginsburg demanded equal pay for equal work in the US Supreme Court, she was initially told the Constitution doesn’t mention ‘women’ or ‘sex’ – so tough luck. 

When classrooms full of children were gunned down, multiple times, defenders of the Second Amendment insisted the Founders were clear: the right to bear arms is sacrosanct. 

But now, as Donald Trump and his allies talk up the idea of him having a third term in the White House, suddenly, we’re told that the 22nd Amendment, which unequivocally states ‘no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice’ is open to interpretation.

On Kamala Harris’s campaign last year, I repeatedly warned about three things that would happen if Trump took office again: he would criminalise abortion, abandon Ukraine, and scrap the democratic process.

In debates with everyone from Trump fanboy Nigel Farage to White House advisor Sebastian Gorka, I was dismissed as dramatic, alarmist, and out of my depth.

When I raised alarms about Project 2025 – the utterly chilling blueprint for authoritarian rule written largely by former Trump officials – I was told by Gorka it had ‘nothing to do with him.’

And yet, here we are – just 70 days into his second term, and already a third of women of reproductive age live under abortion bans. We all saw the sickening scenes with Zelensky in the White House. And at lightning speed, Trump has already enacted an estimated 42% of Project 2025.

Now, the idea of a Trump third term isn’t a punchline anymore – it’s a plan. I’ve been in rooms with strategists, overheard campaign staff, and studied these unhinged proposals more than I care to admit.

‘But how?’ I hear incredulous readers screaming.

Well, the theory from right-wing voices is simple: yes, they concede, the Constitution lays out that no one shall be elected president more than twice. But it says nothing about succession.

Trump, the theory goes, could run as vice president in 2028 – perhaps alongside his current VP, JD Vance. If they win, Vance could be sworn in as Commander-in-Chief and then resign, allowing Trump to assume the presidency through the line of succession.

This isn’t a legal argument – or one that makes much sense. But in MAGA-land, grievance is disguised as logic.

Steve Bannon – a former chief strategist to Trump who was convicted for defying a subpoena related to the January 6 Capitol riot investigation, and pled guilty to fraud – has floated the idea of ‘four more years after the next four.’ 

Former advisors talk openly about Trump being ‘restored’. Republican lawmakers table bills to ‘repeal the 22nd.’ At Trump rallies, I’ve seen T-shirts printed with ‘Trump 2024. 2028. 2032.’

Many assumed this was a reference to his children standing, or a joke. 

But now, they are preparing for Trump to complete over a decade in the Oval Office. 

Trump is surrounded by more loyalists and fewer checks and balances than ever before. The ‘grown-ups in the room’ (I use that term loosely) from his first term are long gone. This administration is stacked with MAGA loyalists who see constitutional norms as optional.

If they think they can force a third term – through lawsuits, executive orders, or sheer chaos – believe me, they will.

The movement isn’t trying to win on policy, governance, or compromise but through sheer brute force. They believe might is right and they’re high on power. Their plan isn’t to govern. It’s to outlast, outmaneuver, and outlive any opposition to its poisonous agenda.

This is how democracies slip: not always with tanks in the streets, but with technicalities, semantics, and very serious men in suits saying, ‘It’s actually more complicated than that.’

In Britain, we’ve been used to believing that America has institutions too sacred, a constitution too set in stone, to be broken. But opposition leadersin the US – especially those working to stop this – are under no such illusion.

The courts are politicised. Congress is broken. State legislatures are in hock to Trump. A President who tried to overturn an election and incited an insurrection is not only not in jail – he’s been re-elected.

We need to stop treating the Trump third term as hypothetical. The groundwork is being laid right now. And from where I’m sitting – just like I predicted nationwide bans on abortion and betraying Ukraine at every turn – it’s terrifyingly plausible.

For those watching from abroad, don’t make the mistake of thinking this is America’s problem alone. We know what can happen when authoritarianism gathers pace.

In the UK, we aren’t powerless. 

Rebuilding and strengthening our European alliances are essential in countering America’s democratic slip ‘n’ slide.

So the next time you hear talk of Trump’s third term, believe it. They’re not joking. They’re not testing the waters. They are planning for a third term.

And if you think the Constitution will save America from it – well, you haven’t been paying attention.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

After joining Gogglebox in 2015, Mary Killen and Giles Wood immediately became firm favourites with fans. 

I was one of them – this stiff-lipped, upper-class ‘hippy’ couple has a clear disdain for pretty much all television they’re forced to endure and are unlike anyone else on Gogglebox. They’re so out-of-place that they somehow feel so perfect for it.

They wince at pretty much everything they’re shown, including their hilarious horror at Naked Attraction.

For years, I was convinced they were liberal lefty academics, with a flair for dancing in fields and championing peace and love. 

I was sold on their fractious relationship, driven by the sort of bickering that can only come with couples who have lived together and been in love for decades.

And then it became clear that I – and so many other Gogglebox fans – had them wrong.

In my defence, they admitted to previously pretending to be lefties (like me) back in the 1990s. During an episode in 2024, Gogglebox stars reacted to two by-election defeats for the Tories to Labour.

Watching the results in their respective battered armchairs, Giles said: ‘Oh God, do you remember that? Labour victory, with all those Labour people crowing about their victory.’

Mary sighed: ‘But this is going to be even worse.’

Giles then candidly admitted: ‘And we pretended that we voted Labour… We thought we were going to be lynched.’ (Mary then proclaimed, ‘you pretended!’)

Considering their comments came during the peak hell of the previous Conservative government, which admittedly doesn’t feel much worse than the mess we’re in under this Labour one, Gogglebox fans were alarmed.

Then last month, Mary and Giles stunned fans again when the latter appeared to back Donald Trump after his row with Volodymyr Zelensky over the Ukrainian President’s suit (or lack of).

Giles also defended Vice President JD Vance from accusations he was raising his voice in the argument.

‘I don’t think he was speaking loudly,’ he told Mary, who teased: ‘We can see which side you’re on. You’re on the side of the wrong’uns!’

The final straw for viewers came last Friday though, when they mocked man-of-the-moment and national treasure-in-waiting Stephen Graham while discussing Adolescence, the Netflix series widely hailed as the most important television in years.

Mary dubbed him the ‘actor who always plays short northerners’.

Graham is one of the finest actors Britain has produced, his IMDB ranges from Al Capone in Boardwalk Empire to a violent boxer in A Thousand Blows, and even Matilda’s dad Mr Wormwood in the Netflix musical adaption of the Ronald Dahl classic.

If anyone has range, it’s Graham.

Mary’s comment came as Sir Keir Starmer announced Adolescence is going to be shown in schools across the UK to tackle misogyny and the increasing popularity of incel culture among young boys.

Created by Graham and Jack Thorne, it’s a rare moment when a televised drama really feels as though it could change the course of history.

Given the timing, there are few things that could have gone down worse with Gogglebox viewers, including backing Trump.

As a result of Mary’s poor jibe, fans of the show in droves have called to ‘get rid’ of the couple. And as someone who spends life determined to be surrounded by my echo chamber of friends, I sympathise.

I, too, can go from zero to 100 when someone shows a glimmer of support for a Tory or Trump because sitting on the fence is no longer an option. 

The world feels like it’s on the brink of collapse, life has never been bleaker, and I stand by blaming everything wrong with the world on right-wing politicians and their reckless greed.

It is unfathomable to me that anyone could have lived through the last 14 years of Conservative rule and have an ounce of sympathy for the Tory Party.

I get the disappointment in Mary and Giles because I felt it too. But unfortunately, Gogglebox would be pointless without them.

Gogglebox reflects the mood of the nation. It’s a celebration of multicultural Britain and its multitude of values and takes on the week’s television.

I categorically disagree with every political statement I’ve heard from Mary and Giles but that’s exactly the point of Gogglebox. Yes, it’s a lol-a-minute but it’s also the best reflection of how Britain has been gripped by the weekly news.

Mary and Giles also raise a different self-confronting issue: can I like someone who doesn’t align with me politically? As long as they’re disguised as a Labour voter, it turns out I can.

Before I knew anything about their political leanings, I’d go as far as to say Mary and Giles were possibly my favourite Gogglebox couple – or at least up there with the greats like Sophie and Pete Sandiford, The Moffatt Family and Warner sisters.

Should I no longer find their dry humour quirky ramblings spoken with the enthusiasm of John Major because they may have voted for him?

The thing is, I just do. They’re wonderfully strange creatures I’d miss if they left Gogglebox.

Gogglebox has always included right-wing views. Boozers Steph and Dom had a ball wining and dining with Nigel Farage for a TV special in 2014, while Andrew Michael stood as a UKIP candidate before he died in 2021, but neither seemed to be met with the same vitriol by Gogglebox fans.

Perhaps it feels more disappointing to have a couple less clearly Conservative turn out to seemingly be sympathetic to Trump, but still, it feels essential to have them there alongside the liberal lefties. 

There are no villains in Gogglebox, that’s part of its charm.

Everyone is brilliant in their own way – whether they voted for Boris Johnson or they worship at the altar of ‘wokeism’, they’re extraordinary ordinary folk who all bring something so unique and special to what on paper is a woefully boring concept.

They give a show that follows everyday people watching TV its life, the eclectic mix of characters keeping it just as popular now as when it began 12 years ago.

Gogglebox airs Fridays at 9pm on Channel 4.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Chappell Roan has sparked controversy by saying that all of her friends who have kids are ‘in hell’.

In the March 26 episode of the Call Her Daddy podcast, she went on to say: ‘I actually don’t know anyone who is like, happy and has children at this age. I have literally not met anyone who is happy, anyone who has light in their eyes, anyone who has slept.’

Whether or not she meant to, she touched a nerve. That’s an understatement actually, she whacked it with a cattle prod because – in the days since – social media has blown up with people on both sides of the fence reacting.

On one side, you have childfree people agreeing with Chappell, applauding her for saying it how it is. And on the other, you have mothers intent on setting the record straight.

Oh my god, I hate all of the in-fighting.

At a time when motherhood – womanhood, actually – is so politicised, I feel the divide between us on this issue only serves to make us weak in a way we cannot afford to be right now. 

American women have had their right to choose what to do with their own bodies ripped from them, UK women are facing colossal childcare costs that are forcing them out the workforce at a devastating rate, and the rise of conservatism online is seeing more and more childfree women criticised and judged for their own choices.

As someone who is absolutely exhausted thanks to a sleep-averse toddler and a newborn, I’m not sure I’m making a lot of sense at the moment. But I must say that I personally enjoy motherhood.

But more interesting than my own views on the subject, I think, is the emotionally-charged nature of this topic and getting to the bottom of why some mothers might be feeling like ‘hell’.

The crux of this is that from as early as we are cognisant, little girls are told that having children will fulfil them. Subliminally and overtly, we are pretty much conditioned to believe that having children is our life’s purpose. This really is a message that doesn’t do anyone any good.

For those that don’t have children for whatever reason, they’re treated like their life is missing something, that they are unfulfilled and without purpose – which is obviously horrible.

And for those who do have children? Well, therein lies the trigger. It took becoming a mother for me to learn that the formula was a little bit more complicated than baby = fulfilment. 

Because while children are incredibly fulfilling, they will not necessarily completely fulfil you. That is not their job, nor their role. And to be honest, the coolest baby in the world is going to be hard pushed being enough fulfilment that a mother can ignore the society that she lives in.

The society that told her that she needed to ‘have it all’ – the job, the family, the body, the friends, the money, the beauty, the time, the peace, the joy. The reality is, we can’t have all of that. At least, not all at once.

Hence, this is where I believe the ‘hell’ that Chappell discusses comes from.

It is incredibly hard to be a mother in this day and age, but it is very hard to say that out loud because when you do, society’s messaging is parroted back at you. 

You’ve had children now, you should be fulfilled, you should be happy, every single minute of every single day, and if you aren’t, then you have failed.

You’re told you’re ungrateful and that this was your choice, and you should be happy about it. This is incredibly detrimental.

On an individual level, it is this rhetoric that means maternal mental health is so bad. But on a societal level, it is dangerous in a whole new way.

When women don’t feel able to complain about motherhood, to acknowledge the difficulties, to highlight an issue, we prevent them from being able to demand a solution. And we desperately need a solution.

It’s gaslighting of a sort, but one that is so intrinsic to our society. It’s so woven into the tapestry of our culture that we often never get far enough back to see the pattern.

I personally don’t think having children is hell. But I do think for a lot of women, they are having children in hell.

They are exhausted, neglected, overstretched, undervalued, and they’re having to work like they don’t have jobs. On top of that, the cost-of-living means parents are making huge and regular sacrifices.

In spite of all of that, motherhood is beautiful. What we need is women on both sides of this divide to acknowledge that.

To deny the existence of the hell, to negate the bad bits and gloss over the problems, it upholds a system that on one hand takes complete advantage of mothers, giving them no support, financial or otherwise as they get on with the job lauded as ‘the most important’ one they’ll ever have.

And on the other, judges the hell out of all the women who choose a different route for themselves.

As the divide grows ever wider, I worry that within it a truly pervasive misogyny grows.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Rachel Zegler is ‘exceptionally beautiful’ but a ‘spoiled, ungrateful and disconnected brat’.

When I woke up to headlines that John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s son, Sean Ono Lennon, had said that about Rachel Zegler, I felt a renewed sense of bone deep conviction that we let too many men be famous.

Your dad wrote Imagine so you get to give your unsolicited opinion on the hotness of women you’ve never met? You may say that I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one absolutely sick of this s***. 

Lennon’s social media remarks are just the latest in what has been a firestorm of controversy surrounding Disney’s Snow White remake – and nepo babies like Sean have been right in the centre of the action.

To catch everyone up, Zegler, 23, stars as the titular princess in the controversial new film, while Gal Gadot appears as the Evil Queen. But despite high hopes, Snow White had a dismal start at the box office, amassing just $45million (£34.8m) in the US and $100m (£77.3m) worldwide in its opening weekend.

Then, Variety released a piece on that some fans felt unfairly blamed Zegler’s views about President Donald Trump and Palestine for the poor performance.

Not long after, Sean Ono Lennon chimed in with his two cents. In a now-deleted tweet, Lennon, 48, whose bio reads: ‘Mega Nepo Baby’ wrote: ‘Both Gal Gadot AND Rachel Zegler are exceptionally beautiful women. Some of y’all are bugging.’

An X user replied to Lennon defending Zegler, as they said: ‘Both actresses are good performers, yet Zegler does not deserve the vilification that Variety and a lot of Disney “fan boys” are constantly giving her.’

Then Lennon added: ‘I agree the vilification went too far. But she also acts like a spoiled, ungrateful and disconnected brat. So it’s no surprise.’

Not only is there nothing more grating than a man snidely explaining, ‘Sorry, how women look actually does matter!’ but it’s bitterly funny for a man born into the kind of wealth and privilege Lennon was to call someone else ‘disconnected.’ 

He joins another nepo baby – Snow White producer Mark Platt’s son, Jonah – in taking up too much space in a cultural conversation.

After Zegler tweeted ‘always remember, free Palestine’ in August last year, Variety reported that producer of the film, Marc Platt, flew to New York to meet with Zegler in an attempt to get her to take the post down, which she allegedly refused. 

So how did Jonah Platt get involved?

In the aftermath of the report, a social media commenter posted on Platt’s Instagram saying : ‘Your dad flew to NYC to reprimand a young actress about this? Any words on this? Cuz that’s creepy as hell and uncalled for. People have the right to free speech, no? Shame on your father.’

Jonah penned a fiery response, which he later deleted, but according to The Hollywood Reporter it read: ‘Yeah, my dad, the producer of enormous piece of Disney IP with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, had to leave his family to fly across the country to reprimand his 20 year old employee for dragging her personal politics into the middle of promoting the movie for which she signed a multi-million dollar contract to get paid and do publicity for.’

He added: ‘This is called adult responsibility and accountability. And her actions clearly hurt the film’s box office.’

Between Lennon and Platt, one has to wonder why these men are qualified to share their opinions at all. 

Lennon’s X post has hundreds of interactions and is being widely discussed online, while Platt’s statement has been published in nearly every major publication.

And make no mistake, what Platt so condescendingly called shirking ‘adult responsibility’ and Lennon labelled acting like a ‘spoiled brat’ is free speech, plain and simple. 

Platt is correct that ‘free speech does not mean you’re allowed to say whatever you want’ without ‘repercussions’, but it looks to me like a mega-corporation attempting to shut down an actress’ ability to advocate for causes she believes in.

What Platt implied in his post is that Zegler should take the money she was given to play Snow White and keep her mouth shut to avoid putting Disney’s investment in jeopardy. 

Lennon seems to feel similarly, acting as though it’s somehow ‘ungrateful’ for Zegler to use her platform to express her politics. 

Neither Lennon nor Platt mentioned that Zegler has weathered her share of ugliness, with controversy surrounding the film beginning nearly four years ago when Zegler, who is of Colombian descent, faced racist backlash after she was cast as Disney’s original princess, most famous for having ‘skin as white as snow.’

But this didn’t receive as much of the blame for the film’s failure as Zegler’s refusal to just shut up and look pretty, as it seems men like Platt and Lennon would prefer she do.  

As I prepared to write a piece about this pair of Daddy’s boys and their bad online takes, I couldn’t help but feel hesitant to further platform their opinions. 

They have a right, as much as Zegler, to share their views on anything they see fit. But the only reason we even know about them is their famous and powerful parents.

What makes a culture interesting is diversity: Diversity of lived experience, diversity of opinion, and diversity of intersectional identity. 

If nepo babies like Lennon and Platt think Rachel Zegler – an accomplished artist who has every right to use her platform as she sees fit – doesn’t deserve the influence she has, how can they possibly justify their own loud voices? 

Maybe it’s time we let the nepo babies shout into the void until they can prove they have something valuable to say. Unfortunately, that day is not today.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing James.Besanvalle@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

There’s a reason the entire nation is talking about Adolescence. 

It grips you from its first one-shot take. The brilliant writers and cast hold you through four harrowing episodes.

It’s far from easy viewing, but like all impactful dramas, Adolescence leaves you talking about it for days afterwards. That’s certainly how it felt watching it with my family. 

Because the power of Adolescence goes further than the small screen. It’s captured something deeper in our national understanding. 

Part of that is because it shines a light on a problem that is too often swept under the carpet.

A problem that many of us are aware of, but too few people feel like they have the tools to respond to: The devastating effect of misogyny on our society. 

The dangers of online radicalisation. The lure of crime in young people’s lives. And the need for role models who can point young people in the right direction.

These are challenges our children, schools and families face every day.

And perhaps most scary of all, just how banal and commonplace it is. How children – young children – can be drawn into this so easily. That it could almost happen to anyone.

That’s why I backed a call in the House of Commons to screen Adolescence in schools.

And now I’m delighted that Netflix is making the drama free for secondary schools across the country. This is a fantastic step to start the essential conversations we need to be having in classrooms across the nation.

Because almost every week, we hear shocking stories of violent crimes against women. 

This Is Not Right

On November 25, 2024 Metro launched This Is Not Right, a year-long campaign to address the relentless epidemic of violence against women.

With the help of our partners at Women's Aid, This Is Not Right aims to shine a light on the sheer scale of this national emergency.

You can find more articles here, and if you want to share your story with us, you can send us an email at vaw@metro.co.uk.

Read more:

• Introducing This Is Not Right: Metro's year-long violence against women campaign
• Remembering the women killed by men in 2024

Just this year, the case of Kyle Clifford, who watched misogynistic content before murdering three women, horrified the nation. His victims included his ex-girlfriend, just because she’d shown the courage to end their relationship. 

I read that, sickened. But it wasn’t new to me. As Director of Public Prosecutions, I saw first-hand the devastation that misogyny and violence leave behind, how it tears through families and communities. 

I think of John and Penny Clough. Their daughter, Jane, was a nurse. She was stabbed to death in the car park of the Blackpool hospital where she worked by the man awaiting trial on multiple charges of raping her.

I vowed then that I would do everything I could to prevent violence against women and get justice for the victims.

So much of this is about prevention, about pulling young boys back before they get in too deep. It’s about youth work, good role models, neighbourhood policing, and mental health support so young people learn to deal with their emotions and the challenges they face. 

But it’s clear that one of the greatest dangers to young people today isn’t on our streets – it’s in the home. 

If children can access corners of the internet that glorify violence and encourage hatred in their bedrooms, there is nowhere they are safe. And parents who think they are doing the right thing are left in the dark about the terrifying content accessible to every young person today. 

I want our young people to learn about treating each other with respect and dignity now, but I also want them to have the opportunities that mean they feel hopeful about the future and an important part of our country.

That’s part of this government’s plan for change. We’ll make sure every child has the best start in life so we can build a better future together.

There isn’t a simple solution, or a single policy lever to pull that will tackle this complicated problem. We’ll need everyone to get involved across society. 

As Prime Minister I will play my part to work with those people who are vital to supporting our children.

It was a privilege to meet with the creators of Adolescence, as well as charities and young people to begin that action, discussing the issues the show raises so powerfully, and how we can come together to keep our children safe.

This is important to me as Prime Minister, just as it was when I was Director of Public Prosecutions. 

But as a father, watching Adolescence with my teenage son and daughter, it hit home hard.

Adolescence has given a voice to everyone fearful and isolated, wondering what to do and wanting to change the culture of male violence. 

It has lit a touchpaper. It may save lives. It has the power to change our country. 

I am so pleased that as many people as possible will watch it. 

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.

Give young people a break

Atticus White (MetroTalk, Mon) says rather than facing a mental health crisis, the young have no emotional ‘resilience’.

Young people get an unnecessarily bad rap. Those I know are leaps and bounds ahead of where we were at their age.

They are running marathons and half-marathons, taking part in Parkruns and directing serious plays in local amateur dramatics groups.

They are studying hard at university and bagging jobs early doors, they are competing in swimming galas, baking cakes, arranging gatherings for friends IRL (in real life), winning prestigious educational awards and much more.

They are absolutely wonderful and wonderfully inspirational.

I am a mother of two (20 and 15) and know a lot of young people!

Yes, as Atticus says, they do appear to be on their phones a lot but it’s all balanced out by the above. We can’t get away from phones as we all manage our lives on them. Take inspiration from the youth of today. They are amazing. Maggie, Harrow

The future of work: more automation, fewer jobs

‘The idea of 100 per cent employment is farcical’
Jimmy (MetroTalk, Fri) says Labour’s benefits cuts do not go far enough – suggesting people should ‘get a job’ to ‘escape poverty’, and not rely on the state.

I’m a trained engineer and work voluntarily as getting a job is much harder in a climate of AI and automation.

The idea of 100 per cent employment is farcical given immigration and population rises. Labour is so lacking in foresight they are creating an underclass.

I urge Jimmy to read Rise Of The Robots by Martin Ford and see that the job market is succumbing to ever more automation. Look at supermarkets losing checkout staff to self-service tills.

More unemployed people needing taxpayer-funded benefits is a recipe for disaster and this government is leading us into it. DL Borrell, Hazelhurst

Some people will always need benefits and that’s okay

‘My son will always need benefits’
I would love Jimmy to meet my son. He is 25 years old but operates at the level of a young child.

His disabilities, present from birth, are so severe I was twice offered a termination during my pregnancy. He has up to 40 seizures a day, is in constant pain, struggles to absorb nutrition and is autistic as well as learning disabled.

He needs someone with him 24/7 and sleeps only four hours or so per night. He would love to work part-time but I don’t see an employer taking him on any time soon.

He will always need benefits. I look after him 24/7 and so I require benefits too – carer’s allowance and universal credit.

The benefits that my son and I get are indeed a benefit. They benefit the state, which otherwise would have to support him in extremely expensive residential care. Annie, Leicestershire

Means testing pensions? That’s not how insurance works

‘In the case of national insurance contributions, the insured event is loss of income upon retirement’
Julian (MetroTalk, Thu) argues in favour of means-testing the state pension on the basis that it is an insurance payout.

Following his logic, if Julian’s house burns down, his insurers should only pay out if he can’t afford to rebuild his house from whatever savings he has at the time of the loss.

When people pay insurance premiums, it is on the understanding that if an event occurs that is covered by the policy, they will receive a payout, regardless of their financial circumstances.

In the case of national insurance contributions, the insured event is loss of income upon retirement. Jon, Newcastle

We need fewer degrees and more skilled tradespeople

‘in order for our society to function it needs skilled workers’
We’re told there’s a shortage of truck drivers, as well as builders.

A main reason for this is that recent governments have wanted to get more school leavers to go into higher education, rather than learning a trade.

But in order for our society to function it needs skilled workers such as builders, plumbers and lorry drivers. A Wills, Ruislip

Metro has helped me laugh and learn since schooldays

‘I first picked it up in year 6. I’m 20 now.’
It’s not particularly related to any topic but I really just want to express my gratitude to everyone behind the scenes at Metro.

I’ve been picking up a paper since I began taking the bus to school in Year 6. I’m 20 now – a uni student – and I still look forward to the thought-provoking features that the paper provides each weekday, the stories centred around intriguing people and the opinions and Good Deeds mentioned in MetroTalk.

It’s educated me about issues I’d never before considered, humoured me and led to some great conversations over the years.
I also love that wherever I am in the country, I’ll see the paper when I take public transport. To this day, it still excites me!
So, thank you again. Zsazsa, Manchester

Click here to order a print or call 0191 6030178

Nobody likes to feel old. But when you’re a mum of teens, it’s hard not to feel ancient at times: try mentioning to your child that you existed before the internet and it’s as if you’re telling them you lived in a cave. 

What I didn’t expect, however, was to be reminded of the yawning generational gap between myself and my daughter when I mentioned that I used to enjoy shopping.

Last week, having left it a bit late to do an online order, I took my 15-year-old to our local H&M in Kings Lynn to pick up a couple of hoodies. 

And, while browsing the rails, I happened to remark that, at her age, I’d used to go shopping for fun.

Her face said it all.

She gave me a look of both horror and disgust, as if to say: Why would someone actually do that? 

As a Gen Xer of a certain age, the idea of having either spare time or spare cash to wander aimlessly, browse and find something fun to wear or own is a distant dream. 

But it’s always been the norm that, when women like me step away from the high street frontline, a new generation of up and coming consumers would step into the breach. 

Only, quite simply, they are not and the reality is that 67% of Gen Z prefer to shop online than in person.

While I see the appeal – online shopping certainly feels easier – I can’t help but feel that those who shun the real-life shopping trip are missing out.

In person, shopping for one thing can mean browsing shelves and seeing things you wouldn’t have known to search for. It can also mean trying things on and being inspired. How could someone not love shopping for these things alone?

This generational gap certainly isn’t down to a lack of consumerism on the part of younger people. 

Yes, perhaps some youngsters are more aware of the origin of their trainers or are at pains to invest in ethical brands, but just as many are simply taking their business online. They still love fast fashion, they just shop at Shein and ASOS instead.

It’s more likely that this tendency to stay away from stores IRL is more a symptom of Gen Z’s preference to experience life through a screen. And we’re all the poorer for it. 

In recent years, many of us have watched aghast as some of the staple stores of our high streets have closed their doors: BHS in 2016, Debenhams in 2020. Even Wilko – a great budget store for our times – virtually disappeared from sight in 2023.

And now, WHSmith – a high street staple – has been sold, it’s set to reduce or rebrand its presence.

My concern is that in-person shopping will die out completely.

And if our high streets, and the traditions of meeting pals in town to wander aimlessly, die out completely, then what is left for them?

In some ways, our kids have never been more connected – they can travel through space, make friends and play games with people across the globe, or chat with their school chums all at the flick of a finger.

But in others, the world our kids live in is vanishingly small, often leaving them confined to the four walls of their bedroom.

It’s not surprising, therefore, that experts fear British teenagers are losing the skill of chatting to someone in-person.  

Even though my kids still take part in clubs and sports, get their share of fresh air, and hang out with friends in real life, I think most of us can agree phones are taking up too much space in our children’s worlds. Shopping is just another victim of this change in lifestyle. 

For me, my weekly Saturday shopping sessions were a chance to try out different versions of myself. 

Yet, these days, instead of trying on hats in Dorothy Perkins, Gen Zs have turned to influencers for style tips with 60% having made a purchase on the back of an influencer recommendation.  

It’s not just sad, but disheartening. Surely it’s healthier to go shopping with a friend?

I accept that society has changed, in fact most of us, and I include myself in this, can’t imagine how we managed before online retail giants came along.

But while these youngsters may not see the issue with a depleting high street right now, the complete death of real life retail will hit them harder than they realise in years to come.

Without physical stores, what will happen to the frontline Saturday jobs which offer our kids skills and extra cash they find invaluable? What will happen to those miniscule interactions with people that only come with getting out and about?

Lockdowns already deprived them of so much, it could get worse.  

There’s not much that can be done, so the only cure I can think of is to make my own sacrifice…

I’m going to have to go shopping again, if only to keep the high street going until my kids are ready to appreciate it.

If that means raiding the savings pot and ditching the family for my bestie on a Saturday, I suppose I’ll just have to shoulder the burden. 

And when I’m browsing through my favourite stores, I’ll remind myself of one simple thing: that I’m doing it for the kids. 

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

On April 3, 2023, San Francisco drag legend Heklina (also known as Steven Grygelko) was found dead at a rented flat in Soho.

She was in London preparing for a run of shows at the Soho Theatre with her good friend and fellow drag queen, Peaches Christ (Joshua Grannell), who was the one who discovered her body.

Two years on, a police investigation is still ongoing, and there is no official cause of death, but it’s believed drugs may have been involved. Then in January this year, the Metropolitan Police released CCTV footage of three men who were ‘at the flat in the early hours’ of the morning Heklina died.

‘We need to establish what happened,’ said DCI Dean Purvis, ‘and how Steven was when they left.’

The big unanswered questions remain then – were people with Heklina when she died? Were they involved? Did they leave her to die? And the reason I’m writing this piece, why did the Met wait almost two years to release this vital footage? Was it media pressure around the case?

In the two years since her death, I believe that the police have failed consistently. Peaches Christ and Nancy French, listed as next of kin, have been ignored and leads have not been properly investigated. The former tells me that police have had Heklina’s phone and not accessed any data on it.

So my assessment of the situation is that the police have failed Heklina on all fronts and I believe that the implications are clear – if you’re queer or gender non-conforming and your death is suspected drug-related, it’s not worth looking further.

I didn’t know Heklina well, but I was a big fan from afar.

She was a San Francisco institution – a true force of nature. I remember seeing a David Bowie tribute at her club, Oasis, just as I was starting out in drag and being incredibly inspired by her.

She went on to give me my first international booking – at that same club – two years before I was on RuPaul’s Drag Race UK. Her death leaves a big hole in the drag and queer community, both in San Francisco and abroad.

Ever since her passing, Peaches has continually expressed frustration at the pace of the investigation or lack of updates. To the point Detective Chief Superintendent Christina Jessah stated last month: ‘We apologise and will be taking steps to correct this.’

But the ineptitude runs deeper than just this case.

It’s been two years since the Casey Review (commissioned following the murder of Sarah Everard) found the Metropolitan Police to be institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic, in need of radical reform, and that the force can ‘no longer presume that it has the permission of the people of London to police them’.

It added: ‘A point where the majority of a group of [LGBTQ+] people do not have confidence in a public body should serve as a red flag signal that something needs to drastically change.’

One particular failing the Casey Review highlighted was the Met’s handling of investigating serial killer Stephen Port. Around a decade ago, he killed four young gay men by overdosing them on drugs and then dumping their bodies.

The Met investigations initially treated all four deaths as ‘non-suspicious’, despite them sharing ‘clear similarities’ and in spite of repeated concerns being raised by people close to the victims and the wider community.

And now here we are again. Another death – unlike the Stephen Port murders – but countless protestations from our community falling on deaf ears.

So I have to ask: How can a police force protect queer communities when it has been found to be institutionally homophobic? The Met’s failures destroy trust, making it harder for LGBTQ+ people to seek protection or report crimes.

Many fear secondary victimisation — being dismissed, mocked, or ignored by the very institution meant to serve them. We’ve seen all of these issues plainly in the handling of the investigation in the two years since Heklina’s death.

In a world where anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric is on the rise, our rights are being threatened, and hate speech is normalised, we need faith in our institutions to protect us. 

Old tropes – like calling drag queens paedophiles – have become all-too commonplace. I am unfortunately well aware of this rise and I was lucky enough to be able to fight back against this (and win) in the civil courts.

What’s clear to me is that, in the two years since Heklina’s death, the only thing that seems to have spurred the police into action is public scrutiny – that means going to the media and shaming them into action.

Thankfully, Heklina has friends willing to fight this battle. But this cannot be the path to justice because it paints a picture of a broken policing system.

Who else has been forgotten? Who else has died, but without high-profile friends to champion them?

So we have to protest. Not just for Heklina, but for all marginalised groups who have been let down by this system.

Today, I helped organise a protest against institutional homophobia within the Metropolitan Police. Myself and many others gathered outside New Scotland Yard to demand justice for Heklina and for all impacted by police bias.

There were drag artists from the UK and San Francisco speaking, alongside people from the nightlife industry, activists, and people with experience of police bias.

It’s clear to me that the only way we’re going to get police movement in this case is to demand it publicly.

These are our demands – release Heklina’s coroner’s report (including her cause of death), offer a full apology to her family and friends for a failure to communicate and investigate fully, commence a full internal investigation of the case.

Also update the public on the implementation of the Stephen Port inquest recommendations (changing how they handle unexpected death investigations, introducing new training, changing internal policies, carrying out a review of deaths from GHB poisoning and changing how they engage with the LGBTQ+ community).

At the end of the day, reform is not optional; it is urgent. How much more will it take for the Metropolitan police to finally change?

Heklina’s family and friends are still waiting for answers – it’s an injustice they haven’t received them yet.

Detective Chief Superintendent Christina Jessah, who leads policing in the local area, told Metro: ‘We know that many feel deep distress following Steven’s death and some feel frustration with the pace of the police investigation. We are also aware of the concerns of Steven’s next of kin and have apologised to them directly.

‘A full review of the investigation is ongoing to establish any missed opportunities.  We continue to examine all lines of enquiry in relation to Steven’s death and remain steadfast in our determination to establish the facts.’

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing James.Besanvalle@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Throughout my life, even before coming out as trans, I have faced sexual assault, harassment, and misogyny – like almost every woman I know. 

And on Trans Day of Visibility, I want to remind people that being trans does not shield me from the realities of being a woman, in fact, it often worsens them. 

Some of the worst abuse I’ve endured has been precisely because I am a woman who is also trans – including being sexually assaulted by more men than I can count, being stalked, fetishised, and receiving unwanted sexual comments and pictures. 

People don’t know I am trans unless I tell them, and I am perceived as a woman everywhere I go – for better, or for worse. This is how I live my life, and my experiences reflect that.

Without getting into detail about those experiences, all of them have left a lasting impact on me – and are a horrifying reminder of how easy it is for men to abuse women and get away with it.

That’s why, as we as a society continue our efforts to combat violence against women and girls (VAWG) – we must include all women, including trans women and anyone presenting femininely.

The fight against gender-based violence must be intersectional – without this, we may as well give up. 

Women’s experiences are shaped by racism, ableism, classism, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of oppression – and in turn, that shapes the forms in which sexual harassment and abuse happens and impacts us.

Ignoring these intersections means ignoring the full reality of gender-based violence. And that ignorance is not only unhelpful, it could be deadly. 

Research consistently shows that trans people – especially trans women like me – are particularly vulnerable to violence. 

A 2021 US-based Williams Institute study found that, in the year 2017-18, trans people are four times more likely than cis people to experience violence, including sexual assault and rape. 

Research in the UK from the Crown Prosecution Service suggests that 62-73% of trans people face harassment and violence as a result of their gender identity. 

This Is Not Right

On November 25, 2024 Metro launched This Is Not Right, a year-long campaign to address the relentless epidemic of violence against women.

With the help of our partners at Women's Aid, This Is Not Right aims to shine a light on the sheer scale of this national emergency.

You can find more articles here, and if you want to share your story with us, you can send us an email at vaw@metro.co.uk.

Read more:

• Introducing This Is Not Right: Metro's year-long violence against women campaign
• Remembering the women killed by men in 2024

Specific hate crimes are also rising. At least 4,780 transphobic hate crimes were reported in England and Wales in the year 2023/24, up from 2,799 in the year 2020/21. 

These stats don’t come as a surprise to me, and is a harrowing reminder of how vulnerable trans people are to violence. 

This is why it’s so frustrating and offensive when people diminish our experiences, refuse to believe us, and willingly want to exclude us from services and support.

It’s why I will continue to raise awareness and fight against gender-based violence for all. 

For myself as a survivor, and all those survivors who are not believed, pushed aside and excluded.

In the U.S., Black trans women are disproportionately affected, facing violence and murder at alarming rates compared to their white counterparties – showing us quite clearly how racism, transphobia and misogyny make the violence they face even more extreme. 

The murders of UK trans women Naomi Hersi (2018), Amy Griffiths (2019), and 16-year-old trans schoolgirl Brianna Ghey (2023) underscore the urgent need for action. 

In January, an 18-year-old trans girl was brutally beaten and stabbed by a group of her peers. Thankfully, she survived, but this attack highlights the escalating violence against trans people in the UK. 

And that cannot be separated from the wider epidemic of violence against women and girls. 

It’s a scourge we must all work together to eradicate. 

Recorded cases of VAWG in England and Wales rose by 37% in the five years between 2018 and 2023. 

That’s 3,000 offences a day. And many more are suspected to go unreported. 

Despite efforts from authorities, greater commitment is needed to end violence against all women and girls, and give more support to survivors who have already suffered. 

As someone who has worked with a sexual abuse survivor centre – and as a survivor myself – I know firsthand how vital these services are. 

Yet they are often underfunded and inaccessible to many, including trans women. 

Denying a survivor help simply because she is trans is not just discriminatory, it contradicts the very purpose of these services. 

Trans women experience domestic violence and sexual abuse like any other woman, and we deserve the same support, respect, and dignity. 

We are not less than anyone, and it’s inhumane to deny us the same support.

Because we are all in this fight together. 

In Iceland, where I am from, trans women receive strong support within the women’s rights movement and I feel much better supported there, where trans women are included and listened to. 

Instead of being wrapped up in a toxic debate about less than 1% of the population like in the UK, and spending valuable energy, resources and time fighting each other for no real reason, we need to wake up and identify the real problem – which is male violence, perpetrated by cisgender men. 

Solidarity and allyship with each other are crucial. 

Compassion and kindness should not be the exception – it should be the founding principle within our society and within the women’s rights movement. It is absurd that some argue trans women do not deserve the same recognition and protection as other women. 

That doesn’t help anyone except the perpetrators of VAWG.

The truth is simple: None of us are free until we are all free. Ending violence requires an intersectional approach that demands safety, dignity, and respect for all women – trans or otherwise.

No one can be left behind.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Walking through the airport, I soon spotted my arch nemesis: Ryanair’s ‘cage of doom’ bag sizer.

Many a traveller has fallen victim to its tight measurements in the past, leaving them with no option but to pay the extortionate on-the-spot fee of £46-£60 – just so they can indeed have clean underwear on their next adventure.

Today, however, I vowed that would not be me – thanks to an impressive Primark 8-Wheel Hard Shell Underseat Suitcase, for just £25.

Lifting my case into the sizer, at first it appeared there was no chance it was going to fit. Luckily, I had a singular trick up my sleeve…

I pressed the release buttons on the sides of each wheel and in seconds, had all four of them in a little bag, which then got stuffed inside my pocket. Then, holding my breath, I once again lowered the now wheel-less suitcase into the sizer.

One deliberate prod later and the case fell neatly into place – and the Primark case fit like a glove. 

‘Bingo!’ called a woman watching on from the queue behind me. She was right, I did in fact feel like a winner and it’s all thanks to Primark’s new suitcase.

As someone who loves to travel but refuses to pay a penny more on a trip than for her cheap airfare, I am always on the lookout for an underseat bag that’s going to help make that a reality.

The problem is, bags that promise to fit the baggage allowance requirements for the likes of Ryanair, WizzAir and EasyJet can often get quite bulky just due to the volume of items people try to cram into such a small space. 

So, when I stumbled upon this gem during a routine trip to Primark – ironically while scouting for a different bag I’d heard about – I was really buzzing.

It was the words ‘removable wheels’ printed on the tag that caught my eye and brought me to my knees with glee.

That may be a slight exaggeration, but I did find myself bounding over to the shelves, eyes practically bulging in anticipation and excitement. ‘Could this case be the one I’d been searching for for all these years?!’ I thought.

Now, admittedly, this wasn’t my first foray into Primark’s ‘viral’ luggage. Last year I picked up its similar-sized soft black bag with two wheels and a hidden handle and was pleasantly surprised at its practicality.

While the measurements were a couple of cm over the allowance, it passed the dreaded airport test, and it even survived a seven day trip to Estonia.

Yet it wasn’t the material of this newest find that gave me pause, rather it was the case itself.

See, I’ve never understood the desire to take a suitcase as part of your small cabin baggage allowance before – when you’re only given 40x20x25cm, in my opinion, the wheels and handle eat up valuable packing space, why not opt for something else?

However, if you were to take the wheels out of the equation, that suddenly makes a lot more sense. Plus, hard sides could also prevent overpacking, which would satisfy many an anxious traveller.

So, suitcase trundling swiftly behind me, I left Primark £25 poorer and ready to put this bag to the ultimate Ryanair test.

At home, I was impressed to find that the suitcase came in at the stated measurements and, when it came to packing, I was able to squeeze in enough clothes, underwear and swimwear for a three day trip.

I even got a spare pair of shoes, a toiletry bag, an electronics bag, a travel adaptor and a phone tripod inside, too. 

But now it was packed to the brim, would it actually fit in the baggage sizer?

En route to the airport, I was happy to find that the suitcase handled well, especially on smooth surfaces. It required a bit more force on hills and cobblestones, but when the wheels hit vinyl floors, I felt close to pure joy.

Then it was time for the moment of truth.

I didn’t have too many concerns going in to be honest as it seemed Primark had thought of everything, even down to the small black bag designed for storing the wheels.

Still, watching it fall so neatly into place was a great moment and one I’m sure all money-savvy travellers would enjoy too.

My only lingering concern is that Ryanair’s baggage policy specifically states that a ‘small bag’ is a ‘small personal bag, such as a handbag, laptop bag or backpack’. It might not explicitly prohibit a suitcase (even one without wheels) but get the wrong member of gate staff and you could have an issue.

Therefore, my advice is to remove the wheels before joining the queue and either store them inside the case or in a pocket so as to avoid attracting more attention than is necessary.

Hopefully this reduces your chance of being stopped and keeps the boarding process smooth for everyone. 

Overall, this new Primark suitcase does indeed get my seal of approval. It’s a great quality find for the price and it’ll certainly turn a few heads at the gate.

In fact, I can’t wait to take it on my next Ryanair flight with me and I think I’ll actually be disappointed if they don’t ask me to measure it. Cage of doom, come at me!

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Walking home from the pub on Christmas Eve, my blood suddenly ran cold.

This always happens when someone uses childhood sexual abuse (CSA) as a cheap gag. But to have a family member make light of such a topic – especially in a conversation about why I will never have children – hurt even more.

‘At least if you don’t want kids, you never need to worry about you being a paedophile, eh?’ they’d quipped.

To them it was a ‘meaningless joke’. But for me, it triggered a series of nightmares that loomed over me for the rest of the Christmas period.

The punchline brought me back to the worst years of my life, torturing me with vivid flashbacks and night terrors.

So while I’ve long made peace with my decision not to have kids – it would kill me to see them go through what I endured as a child – I’m tired of pretending to accept these jokes.

I’m not being sensitive. These kinds of comments normalise abuse. Perpetuating them contributes to the epidemic of CSA that allows 1 in 4 children to become victims. That has to stop.

When a family friend started grooming me at age seven, I knew it was weird for a grown man to make a child his confidante, but I didn’t have the language to speak up.

Over time, he pulled me into a dark web of grooming and sexual abuse and gradually I learned to maintain a mask for everyone else, while drowning in grief on the inside.

As I secretly wrestled with the abuse, paedophile jokes were flying in the classroom.

This Is Not Right

On November 25, 2024 Metro launched This Is Not Right, a year-long campaign to address the relentless epidemic of violence against women.

With the help of our partners at Women's Aid, This Is Not Right aims to shine a light on the sheer scale of this national emergency.

You can find more articles here, and if you want to share your story with us, you can send us an email at vaw@metro.co.uk.

Read more:

• Introducing This Is Not Right: Metro's year-long violence against women campaign
• Remembering the women killed by men in 2024

Even in primary school, quips about paedos and nonces were rampant and teachers rarely intervened; some even laughed along.

Everyone seemed unaffected by the reality they were mocking but as a child experiencing what everyone was making light of, I didn’t see the funny side of it. Instead, I internalised the unspoken message that this is normal, and it’s not serious. So I laughed along to fit in.

Of course, the only person responsible for my abuse is my abuser, but paedophile jokes provided the script to silence me for years. It contributed to my belief that the abuse, in my abuser’s words, ‘wasn’t anything to worry about’.

The only hint I got of how abusive this person was happened when he directly asked me if it was OK to touch me – a sick tactic many abusers use to make children feel responsible for their abuse – but the combination of the grooming and the jokes convinced me to bury my experiences.

I wouldn’t escape the abuse until nearly three years later when the family friend lost access to me because I stopped spending time at his house. 

When it stopped, I felt relieved that I got my physical freedom back but I didn’t truly understand what I was a victim of until my teens.

My realisation was a slow burn at first, triggered by numerous things, like mentions of abuse in PSHE classes in high school and storylines on soaps. However, when my mum read my diary at age 13, I realised just how severe it was. Her horror broke the dam of silence.

She believed me instantly, encouraging me to explain what had happened so I could report it. That was the moment everything clicked and it shook me to my core to realise that I was a victim.

I didn’t want to be associated with that word; I wanted to be a normal kid without any worries, but my abuser stole that possibility.

Dealing with the social services only exacerbated my anxiety and depression because they pushed me not to bother pursuing it in court, telling me I’d likely not win a case.

Even though my abuser admitted to most of my accusations to the social worker who questioned him, I decided not to pursue charges because I thought it would re-traumatise me. 

I couldn’t bear the thought of going to court only to lose and watch him walk free.

Yet, the guilt of not putting him in prison because I dropped the case and leaving others vulnerable to his abuse crucified me, delaying my recovery even further.

At 14, my mum encouraged me to go to therapy. But I wasn’t ready, only managing one session before descending into an eight-year cycle of self-harm and substance abuse.

Eventually, I broke that self-destruct cycle after opening up to my mum and my first boyfriend.

As I’ve grown into adulthood, I’ve come to terms with the fact that I have complex PTSD – a type of PTSD that occurs after repeated or prolonged trauma – and gaining an understanding of how long-term trauma has changed the pathways in my brain has enabled me to confront it head-on.

There’s no doubt those few years in childhood irrevocably changed my sexuality and my understanding of consent, making me more vulnerable to other types of abuse. But I’ve learned to counteract these effects with compassion, self-love, and eternal self-development.

Despite my progress though, I’m still horrified by the commonality and normality of paedophile jokes.

I’ve pledged to start challenging these kinds of ‘jokes’ whenever I hear them

Society gaslit me into silence with punchlines, mocking mine and countless others’ experiences for entertainment. I refuse to continue aiding and abetting these sick jokes.

That’s why I confronted the person who triggered my worst memories over Christmas. I told them I would walk away if they ever did that to me again.

They were understanding yet dismissive in that they claimed they could not police it while drunk. I now avoid being around them when alcohol is involved.

More generally though, I’ve pledged to start challenging these kinds of ‘jokes’ whenever I hear them.

Sometimes that means I will respond by describing, in detail, the exact memory that they’ve triggered in exchange for a s****y joke. If I’m uncomfortable, then you can be, too.

I don’t always have the energy to lecture whenever someone makes one of these comments though; on those occasions I stonewall instead.

I don’t laugh and I ask why they think that’s funny. And, when they finish their weak explanation, I tell them that if they’d ever met a psychopathic paedophile, they wouldn’t find it so amusing.

When I do this, most people react awkwardly, either changing the subject or trying to joke their way out of it. I think being confronted with their own stupidity makes them less likely to challenge me on it. No one wants to fight for their ‘right’ to make paedophile jokes.

Childhood sexual abuse impacts every subsection of society, regardless of gender, race, religion, class, or ethnicity, and it traumatises people into silence. Yet, instead of empowering survivors to speak up, we’re driving them back into the darkness by laughing at them.

Our flippancy as a society allows abuse to fester by relegating it to the underbelly of society where no one can confront it, which is what abusers want.

To truly combat this we need survivors to feel empowered to speak up and to know that we believe them and won’t trivialise their experiences for a cheap punchline.

Survivors shouldn’t have to slink off to cry in the toilets or sit in grim silence while people make light of our trauma. Which is why I’ve recruited my family and friends to challenge these jokes with me, and I encourage you to do the same.

It’s up to all of us to say ‘no more’ and remember: When you speak up, you’re also speaking up for every other survivor.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Wedding planner and venue owner Alison Rios McCrone helps solve your dilemmas, no matter how big or small, in a weekly agony aunt column.

Dear Alison, 

I’ve just received my wedding album after a wait of three months and both my wife and I are really disappointed.  

Our photographer sent us the photos online for us to pick the ones we wanted in the album, and they all looked fine.

However, lots of the photos have been printed very small in the album, and up to four have been crowded onto the same page. It’s really hard to make out the details and looks really unprofessional. 

We spent £500 on this album and it just hasn’t lived up to expectations at all. Can I ask for a refund? 

Thanks, 

Rob 

Dear Rob, 

I can imagine the disappointment you must have felt after waiting three months for your wedding album, only to find that it didn’t meet your expectations.  

A wedding album is not just a collection of photos but a beautiful, lasting keepsake – a perfect reminder of your special day that you’re proud to share and revisit. 

It’s important to remember that you have every right to raise your concerns with the photographer and explain why you’re unhappy with the album. 

Emphasise that while the individual photos appeared fine online, their small and crowded presentation in the album compromised the overall effect and was not what you expected. 

Explain that the multiple small images crammed onto each page is not designed how you imagined and does not do justice to the moments you carefully chose to include, particularly given the £500 cost. 

Rather than requesting a refund immediately, the best approach would be to request a reprint of the album with a redesigned layout that allows your chosen images to be printed larger and displayed more thoughtfully.  

A wedding album is to showcase your memories beautifully and not to squeeze them into cramped spaces. 

As a travel photographer, I know that image quality can sometimes change when photos are enlarged, depending on resolution and original quality.  

It may be worth speaking to your photographer about this as well.  

Your photographer will want to take the necessary steps to satisfy your request

Before the reprint, discuss your expectations with the photographer so they clearly understand what you need. 

This will help ensure that the new album meets your expectations.  

Your photographer should be able to guide you on this and help create an album that indeed does justice to your special day.  

Their expertise and commitment to their craft should give you confidence in the potential for a satisfactory resolution. 

As a last resort, if your photographer is not willing to try to fix the issue, I do not think it is unreasonable to ask for a refund, whether full or partial. 

However, your photographer will want to take the necessary steps to satisfy your request. They will understand that their reputation depends on it.  

By working with the photographer, I hope you will soon have an album you’ll be proud to treasure for years. 

Best wishes, 

Alison

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

‘Pull the duvet down so I can see better,’ Alex tells me as I slide my hands further down my body.

My boyfriend is standing in the doorway to our bedroom, while I am naked in bed. Following Alex’s order, I toss the sheet aside and expose my naked self to him.

It feels a tiny bit embarrassing at first but I know that he loves my body – he makes a point to tell me all the time – so I push any intrusive thoughts aside. Instead, I embrace the moment.

Staring back at my boyfriend, I smile and start playing with myself.

I don’t invite Alex into bed and he makes no effort to join me either – but his hungry eyes are following my every move. We keep eye contact the entire time but don’t speak beyond Alex uttering the occasional encouraging phrase, like how ‘incredible’ I look and to ‘keep going’.

You could cut the sexual tension with a knife. 

A few minutes later, I climax. It feels delicious – even more so because I am acutely aware that my boyfriend is watching. Once I’ve caught my breath, we both laugh at the randomness of the situation.

Alex had only popped his head into the bedroom to ask if I wanted coffee, when I decided to give him this unexpected treat. He asks if I’d like to take things further (read: have sex) but I’m pretty sated, so I politely decline.

My boyfriend jokingly pulls a disappointed face before announcing that he’s off to take a very cold shower. And, I imagine, have a wank of his own.

This isn’t the first time I’ve masturbated in front of a lover but I’ll admit, it’s been a while.

Partly because I have a pretty great sex life, so recently I haven’t felt the need to ‘go it alone’. But also because I enjoy solo sessions in the morning and rarely get the bed to myself at that time of the day. 

I’m an early riser and Alex likes to sleep in. And while I could get myself off in the shower (too wet) or on my fancy velvet sofa (too expensive), I’d really rather not. 

But this recent experience reminded me of how amazing it can feel to trust in yourself and your lover – and just let go. 

It’s a little embarrassing to admit but I got off on the power.

From talking to people about sex and masturbation over the years, I know that many of them – especially women – feel awkward or unable to play with themselves in front of a lover.

One friend, who is in a long-term relationship, once said it was ‘unthinkable’. The mere idea made her cringe. Funnily enough, her boyfriend had no qualms about giving himself a tug in front of her.

In this instance, my pal wasn’t asking for my advice so I didn’t give any. Though I did tell her about an amazing experience I’d had in the hopes that it might serve as inspiration.

It happened about 10 years ago.

I was on a call with a man I’d been casually seeing for a while, when our conversation escalated to phone sex. Feeling bold, I turned the video function on and held my phone in my hand while playing with myself. 

It was a bit of a balancing act, mind you.

Sure, I noticed that my tummy was rolling up a bit and silently cursed myself for not shaving my legs before the call. But then I told myself, ‘Who the hell cares?’ My lover sure didn’t.

Soon enough, he joined in on the fun by pulling his trousers down and we climaxed together.

The reason this masturbation experience stands out is mostly due to the video element. Being able to see my body and what I was doing to it – while simultaneously seeing my partner’s face – felt thrilling. 

It gave me a newfound appreciation for the magical pleasure that my own hands can bring. And because my lover wasn’t in the room with me, I also felt less self-conscious.

In some ways, masturbation is much more personal than sex with another person. After all, you might have been playing solo for years. 

Maybe you’ve got a special routine that you don’t want to share with anyone else or are still figuring out what makes you tick.

It probably doesn’t help that sex is often lauded as an accomplishment or a goal to tick off, while masturbation is much more hush-hush. And women in particular are often judged for enjoying or exploring their body.

Irrespective of gender, if embarrassment is the reason you’re holding back, try to push past that feeling. There’s nothing shameful or ugly about loving your body and the joy it brings.

Keep the covers on at first, if that’s what you need. Or ask your partner to keep their eyes closed – but keep yours open, if you dare.

Harness the power and the high that comes with owning your pleasure. 

Trust me, you look hot. Your lover wouldn’t be in that bed (or in my case, door frame) if they didn’t enjoy your body.

Once you’re ready, toss that duvet to the side. Let go and feel the magic.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

When I first heard about the pending cuts to the Personal Independent Payment, a form of benefit that helps people with the cost of being disabled, I could barely breathe. 

As I watched Liz Kendall, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, lay out the removal of £5billion a year from the welfare system, anxiety swelled, filling every part of my body. 

When Kendall was pressed for details, as millions of us felt panic set in, she told us to wait for the Spring Statement, which was delivered by Rachel Reeves on Wednesday. 

Despite the Chancellor confirming even more cuts to social security, there is still no certainty on how my own benefits will be affected.

The DWP are yet to contact me, but on average PIP claimants are expected to lose an average of £4,500 a year, with hundreds of thousands pushed into poverty. 

But these aren’t just statistics, or numbers on a page. This is about real people. Real people like me and my family. 

The waiting is painful and has flared up every medical condition I have, both mental and physical.

I’m scared that my daughter and I will be plunged into poverty when we’re barely staying above the breadline as is. Many disabled people are. 

I’d only just gone through a reassessment, an examination to determine the level of support I receive, which culminated early this year. 

Reassessment is something I have to do typically every three to four years, and it took nine months, start to finish this time around. Changes may make it harder to pass these assessments, and will definitely cause me more anxiety. 

During the assessment period, my stress levels are consistently high – sometimes lasting for a whole month or two. I’m usually unable to work until I have recovered. So much for the Government’s moral mission to get people back into employment. 

I have a number of diagnoses, and my main symptoms are stiffness, chronic pain, reduced dexterity, subluxations, back pain, severe migraines, extreme fatigue, low and erratic moods, emotional instability and impulsivity. 

As you can imagine, this makes work tricky, and this is largely why I made the decision to be self-employed. 

I cannot commit to shifts due to the unpredictable nature of my symptoms, and cannot do full-time hours. 

It’s part of the cost of being disabled, something PIP is designed to address. 

If my PIP is cut, it won’t incentivise me to work more as the government is claiming.

I can’t be incentivised out of having the conditions that I suffer from. 

And the stress of falling behind on debt payments, falling behind on bills, and not knowing how we’ll make ends meet will flare up my medical conditions and leave me with even less capability for work than I currently have. 

My partner will also have to perform more care duties, leaving him able to work less hours and therefore worsening our financial situation even more.

It seems this isn’t something the Government has considered. 

It is important to remember that, for all the talk of work, PIP isn’t an unemployment benefit. 

It helps people with the extra cost of being disabled.

For me, this extra cost is typically through increased heating bills, accessible housing, pre-prepared food, heavy reliance on my car, and charges for both NHS and private prescriptions.

I also use my PIP for things that keep my symptoms manageable enough to be able to work, such as the gym and various therapies that aren’t available on the NHS.

Instead of targeting disabled people, the Government should work to improve the amount and quality of accessible jobs. 

If they really wanted us to work more, they would make it easier. 

Remote working is getting rarer, and part-time jobs are very in demand and thus hard to come by. 

Recent analysis found that of the 95,000 jobs on the DWP website, only around 560 are fully remote. 

Everything seems so bleak, and Labour’s Spring Statement certainly does feel like austerity all over again.

And that policy was linked to over 50,000 deaths. 

Instead of working to expand austerity, Rachel Reeves should be trying to reverse it. 

Because when disabled campaigners are on the streets saying that cuts kill, they mean it quite literally.

The last thing that disabled people like me need is less money, less support, and more stress. 

So we are not being dramatic, as some have implied – we are not dealing, as one minister said, with ‘pocket money’. 

And we are not going to be incentivised into work. 

As disabled people, we are quite simply terrified. 

And with good reason.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.

Money for roads but not for the most vulnerable

‘The government cares more about roads than people’
Chancellor Rachel Reeves committed £4.8billion towards our road system in the Spring Statement, with £1.6billion already allocated for pothole repairs (Metro, Thu).

Meanwhile another £4.8billion is being cut from social security.

That says it all really, doesn’t it? This government cares more about roads than it does about the people who live around them. The welfare cuts will drive thousands into abject poverty but don’t worry – when they’re sleeping rough, they’ll be sleeping beside newly surfaced roads. Charlie Parrett, Stoke

Reading your ‘Warfare State’ headline and the anger at Labour’s welfare cuts and how 250,000 will be pushed into poverty.

How about they get a job, which is the fastest way to escape poverty and build a better, more satisfying life where work can make you feel valued?

Should the unemployed benefit from benefits?

‘The word “benefits” gives the game away’
I fully support Labour’s cuts and don’t think they go far enough. The system is broken and needs root and branch reform. The word ‘benefits’ gives the game away – you should not ‘benefit’ by not working. Jimmy LC, Ealing

Are NHS waiting lists really shrinking – or are patients being directed to private care?

The government says it will reduce NHS waiting lists. If they do go down, it will probably be because people are being forced to go private. I’m 81 and repeatedly told that I will have to go private for old problems.
Amte, Cheltenham

The UK repaid it’s war debt so why let the US call us ‘freeloaders’?

‘Donald Trump and Vance care nothing about the people of Europe’
Why has our timid prime minister not pointed out to US vice president JD Vance that, far from being ‘freeloaders’, Great Britain repaid all the loan with its crippling interest charges given by
the US during World War II.

It is clear Donald Trump and Vance care nothing about the people of Europe being free from Russian aggression, only how to make vast bucks from minerals.
Owen, London

A fitting headline for Trump’s latest endorsement

‘Surely it should have read…’
Metro’s headline on Wednesday, ‘Trump backs chump’ over the US president refusing to condemn his security adviser Mike Waltz leaking military secrets, seems to contain
a typo. Surely it should have read ‘Chump backs chump’! Colin, Bury

Click here to order a print or call 0191 6030178

MORE: Here are the Signal chat ‘war plans’ Donald Trump insists aren’t classified

MORE: Adolescence left me in tears but also more determined to show our children what healthy masculinity looks like

MORE: Sky News reporter mocked for having a British accent by US congresswoman

This week, Marvel fans were on the edge of their seats as a live streamed video revealed which cast members are set to star in the upcoming blockbuster Avengers: Doomsday.

At least, I was. But it wasn’t unanimous. I saw comments from naysayers claiming that the Marvel Cinematic Universe was done and dusted and should have been snapped into oblivion years ago.

For years, some fans have felt as though the cinematic franchise was on a downward spiral that it had no chance of recovering from, claiming it reached its peak in 2019 with Avengers: Endgame.

And despite how strongly I’ll defend the franchise, I will admit that there was cause for concern.

Over the past few years, the MCU has suffered a few big misses.

2021’s Eternals, starring acting heavyweights including Angelina Jolie and Salma Hayek, received a measly Rotten Tomatoes score of 47% from critics, while the 2023 release Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania achieved a similar score of 46%.

The TV series Secret Invasion – which saw Samuel L Jackson return as the formidable Nick Fury – received a low audience score of 43%, while the show also faced a valid backlash for using artificial intelligence to create its title sequence.

But, to all the people claiming that the end is nigh for the MCU, that it should have ended ages ago, that its attempts to restore its former glory are futile – it’s time to put those worn arguments to rest.

We’ve heard them all before, and in my opinion, they’re just plain wrong.

Are those anti-MCU naysayers forgetting the spate of TV shows and films that have been released between 2019’s Endgame and now that were flat-out brilliant?

In 2021, the launch of WandaVision marked the MCU’s first foray into TV, and it’s widely regarded as one of the franchise’s best and most experimental releases to date.

And on the big screen, there have been plenty of hits too.

One of my personal favourite Marvel films ever is Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, with its heartfelt story, stunning visuals and thrilling fight sequences.

Simu Liu’s return being confirmed in Avengers: Doomsday has been a long time coming.

Four years ago, Spider-Man: No Way Home did the unthinkable – former Peter Parker actors Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield uniting with Tom Holland to reprise their roles.

A year later, Black Panther: Wakanda Forever delivered an absolutely stunning tribute to the late, great Chadwick Boseman, while his on-screen sister Letitia Wright stepped up to take up the mantle of the masked protector and superhero.

In 2023, I went to watch Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 in the cinema on my own when I had a day off work. I was sat there at midday bawling my eyes out, popcorn in hand.

Last year, Deadpool & Wolverine became a cultural moment and grossed more than a billion dollars worldwide, while Agatha All Along proved the enormous appetite that Marvel fans have for stories that are raucously camp and fun.

And far from my enthusiasm dimming, looking ahead to the future, some of the greatest dreams of Marvel fans who’ve read the comics since childhood are finally being realised.

Having been founded in 1939, Marvel has 86 years of content that serves as inspiration for the films and TV shows of the cinematic universe.

That’s why the MCU is bringing the Fantastic Four back after the last attempt at a standalone blockbuster with the team ended in disaster.

Mahershala Ali’s Blade is in the works… and the X-Men, including original stars Sir Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen and Rebecca Romijn are finally going to cross over with the Avengers.

I’m not going to deny there have been roadblocks and turmoil. Blade alone experienced its fair share of obstacles, with fans fearing if it’ll ever see the light of day.

Jonathan Majors’ being fired from his role as Kang the Conqueror after being found guilty of assault and harassment in a New York domestic violence trial threw the next phase of the franchise into chaos, with Robert Downey Jr taking his place as the supposed big baddie the Avengers will face.

Downey Jr’s return, as Victor Von Doom rather than Iron Man, sparked fears that the MCU was out of ideas, and bringing back the Oscar winner was simply a desperate attempt to bring fans back on side, while also a massive money grab.

But I have faith – faith that he and the Russo Brothers, also returning for the first time since Endgame, wouldn’t take this huge gamble if they didn’t think it wasn’t in service to the story, even if they will also end up earning millions in the process.

Downey Jr cares about the fans, and I believe he’ll do his utmost not to let them down.

There is also concern among the fandom that Avengers: Doomsday is going to be rushed, considering its due to come out in May next year, and has only just started production and is due to be released on May 1, 2026.

While I would much rather the studio take its time, let’s not forget that filming for Infinity War and Endgame took six and five months respectively before post-production began.

With the same big names in front of and behind the camera, it’s possible.

The rest of the line-up for Doomsday is shaping up beautifully.

Aside from the fact that the lead cast list has far fewer women than men – something that hopefully will be rectified – this combination of characters has me feeling like a kid again, with the freshness of stars like Simu Liu interacting with legends of the genre like Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, it’s exciting.

As long as the story and the fans are the top priority – and not the billions that the studios are guaranteed to inevitably make anyway – then I see no reason why the MCU has to die.

So with Phase Six of the Marvel Cinematic Universe underway, I for one can’t wait.

Got a story?

If you’ve got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we’d love to hear from you.

Progress for the rights of women and girls around the world is slow.

At our current pace – and if global commitments are adhered to – a girl born today will be nearly 40 years old before women hold as many seats in parliament as men. 

She will be 68 before child marriage is eradicated. She will never live to see the end of extreme poverty for women and girls — a goal that, at this rate, will take another 137 years to achieve. 

What’s more, the backlash against gender equality is growing, with rising resistance and deepening political, social, and cultural challenges that threaten to undo hard-won progress.

However, amidst this context, there is a palpable sense of optimism.

At the 69th session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) held at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City last week, heads of state, business leaders, activists, and advocacy groups gathered for what I like to call the gender equality equivalent of COP, the annual summit on climate change. 

Ours is a global meeting on gender equality, and as  Executive Director of UN Women UK, a charity working to ensure that every woman and girl has access to safety, choice and a voice, I’ve had the privilege of a front row seat to discussions shaping the future of gender equality. It’s been both sobering and energising, as well as a powerful reminder that gender equality is in a fragile state. 

Every speech, every solution presented, and every alliance formed carries a spark of hope. 

On the opening day, UN Secretary-General António Guterres, issued a stark call to action saying that ‘we still live in a male-dominated world with a male-dominated culture. And power is never given, it must be taken. Together, we must seize it.’

At the end of the day, as gender equality is given its rightful place on the world stage, there is no question that while the path ahead is difficult, the momentum for meaningful change is undeniable.

This Is Not Right

On November 25, 2024 Metro launched This Is Not Right, a year-long campaign to address the relentless epidemic of violence against women.

With the help of our partners at Women's Aid, This Is Not Right aims to shine a light on the sheer scale of this national emergency.

You can find more articles here, and if you want to share your story with us, you can send us an email at vaw@metro.co.uk.

Read more:

• Introducing This Is Not Right: Metro's year-long violence against women campaign
• Remembering the women killed by men in 2024

This year’s CSW is particularly poignant as it marks 30 years since world leaders committed to a landmark document called the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, which remains one of the most comprehensive and forward-thinking frameworks for advancing gender equality.

It covers 12 critical areas of concern, including poverty, education, health, violence against women, armed conflict, economy, decision-making, institutional mechanisms, human rights, media, environment, and the girl child.

Now, in 2025, our global vision for securing the rights of women and girls is at risk of slipping through our fingers. But – if CSW is anything to go by – there is light at the end of the tunnel.

One of the key highlights of the event was a renewed commitment to gender equality. During the opening ceremony, member states of the UN – including the UK – agreed to move beyond promises and take decisive action to ensure rights, equality and empowerment for all women and girls to recognise the need for an intersectional approach 

This includes being involved in all aspects of peace processes, including peacekeeping and conflict prevention; investing in education, particularly STEM; and closing the gender gap in AI.

To do this, we must lift women out of poverty. The latest research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation on poverty in the UK found that 6 million people in the UK are living in very deep poverty, defined as living on less than 40% of the median income.

We know that poverty disproportionately affects women, who are often paid less than men and who are far more likely to be single parents and therefore at a higher risk of living in poverty.  

Eradicating this requires a multi-pronged strategy that must include investment in education, but also a commitment by industry and business to close the gender gap. Equal pay for equal work is fundamental and stronger enforcement of equal pay laws and greater transparency in pay structures is vital.

Alongside this, CSW emphasised the importance of revolutionising care in the UK, which must be viewed as an investment, not a cost.

UN Women UK research found that one in four working mothers are being forced to quit work due to lack of suitable childcare options, while 26% of mums have unwillingly reduced their hours. The UK must expand access to affordable childcare, while also providing paid family leave to ensure that families can access the support they need.  

And lastly, we must end gender-based violence. In the UK, a woman is killed by a man every three days on average.

Violence against women and girls is an epidemic so serious the National Police Chiefs’ Council has declared it a ‘national emergency’. We must prioritise prevention and education – implementing public awareness campaigns and educational programmes, as well as encouraging bystander interventions and supporting survivor-centered services.

These are big and daunting topic areas, but I am encouraged and motivated by the resilience and unity of women around the world. We are pushing back – not just for the preservation of progress, but for the further dismantling of systemic inequalities.

I have a fire in my belly hearing from women around the world driving real change. 

We must choose action over apathy. Hope over despair. Because gender equality is the way forward – not just for women, not just for girls, but for the future of humanity. 

Let’s continue to push boundaries, elevate the voices of our marginalised sisters, and turn promises into action.  

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who wept at the end of Netflix’s searingly important drama Adolescence, when Stephen Graham’s character tucks his son’s teddy bear into bed and whispers, ‘I should have done better’.

They were ugly, snotty tears, the kind that take you by surprise. The tragic truth underpinning the fictionalised drama was unavoidable: our boys need better. Our girls deserve better. We all need to do better.

Even if you haven’t watched it, you’ll have heard the conversations echoing across the country. From coffee shops to school gates, daytime TV to late night radio, we are finally addressing the issue of modern masculinity head on and the corresponding need for strong, positive male role models.

My heart has cheered to see Graham and Ashley Walters, the show’s other adult male star, generously share the power of their vulnerabilities.

And I can’t be the only one whose mind has turned, quite naturally, to sport and its transformative power as an antidote to the issues being discussed, even before the prime minister Keir Starmer started quoting Gareth Southgate.

Last year, the Youth Sport Trust reported the happiness and health of children and young people in the UK were at an all-time low, with their mental health and wellbeing among the worst in the world.

The children’s charity drew a direct correlation between a lack of activity and an increase in time spent online, a perfect storm which clears the ground for the kind of toxic indoctrination to which we are seeing our boys subjected.

I have long advocated for the need for social media – and we as users and literal influencers of algorithms – to promote, like and share accounts that show to boys and men of all ages what healthy masculinity looks like. The role models are out there, we just need to shout about them, give them the prominence they deserve.

Allow me to present one such shining example. His name is John McAvoy, and after following him on social media for years, I am fortunate enough to now count him as a friend.

The debate around the influence of role models on young men is crucial to John’s background. At the age of 24, he was given two life sentences for armed robbery, having already served time as a teenager. He spent a decade in high-security prisons.

The stepson of one of Britain’s most prolific armed robbers, John grew up surrounded by organised crime in south London. It was all he ever knew. 
When his best friend died in a high-speed police chase, John had something of an awakening.

Turning to sport, he committed his mind and body to excellence, using a prison rowing machine to break three world and eight British records for indoor rowing. In a six foot by 12 foot box, he completely turned his life around.

John is now one of the most energetic, passionate, fun, infectious forces for good I have ever met. He is truly an exceptional human and the very best example of the kind of man we can all look up to.

He has committed his life to bringing sport to kids from inner cities and now runs the Alpine Run Project, introducing hundreds of young people across the UK to trail running in nature. The six-month programme sees up to 1,000 youngsters come together through sport, with a select number getting to travel to the French Alps to take part in the world’s most iconic trail running race.

His goal is to take young people, specifically from lower socio-economic backgrounds and give them a chance to connect with the world around them, to develop and recognise their inner strength and to learn how to literally move through a world that can be so desperately uncomfortable for so many.

His graduates have gone on to launch careers in music, fashion and media. The end point doesn’t have to be sport but it’s where the confidence and inspiration are born. Applications are open and I urge any of you with access to youngsters between the ages of 16 and 23 to share the link below.

What the current conversation reminds us is we cannot sit back and bemoan the misdirection of our young people any longer. As a society, we all suffer when our kids are radicalised, but we can all be part of the solution. We all need to be part of the solution.

• The Alpine Run Project is still taking applicants for 2025 http://www.ybb.agency/alpine-run-project#apply

MORE: Max Verstappen likes post suggesting Liam Lawson Red Bull axe was ‘bullying’

MORE: Mark Williams says 14-year-old wonderkid ‘up there with Ronnie O’Sullivan’ at same age

MORE: Trent Alexander-Arnold has broken football’s oldest rule with Real Madrid transfer

People in the EU are being advised to stockpile enough food, water, and essentials for 72 hours in a continent-wide strategy to make everyone more prepared for catastrophes such as floods, fires, pandemics, and military attacks.

And it makes me feel more than a little jittery.

The suggested emergency kit should include ID documents in waterproof casing, a Swiss army knife, and playing cards, according to Hadja Lahbib, the European Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness, and Crisis Management.

It worries me when the authorities start doling out advice like this because some of my darkest childhood memories are of ‘survival manuals’ that really didn’t make me feel safe at all – and I don’t think these ones will either.

This latest advice comes just days after the French government announced that it will produce survival manuals to prepare citizens for any ‘imminent threat’ to the country. It’s a scary list of circumstances, with examples like invasions, natural disasters, industrial accidents, or a nuclear leak. 

It will suggest a ‘survival kit’ including plenty of water and food, plus basic medical supplies including paracetamol, compresses, and saline solution.

But France is not alone. Last year, Sweden told people to gather blankets and battery-powered radios, Norway suggested iodine tablets in case things go nuclear, and Germany told people to transform their cellars or garages into bunkers.

It is a cause for concern in an increasingly unstable world, and all of this brings back memories of a survival manual that absolutely petrified me when I was a kid.

The Protect and Survive pamphlet was released by the British government in the 1970s and 80s, advising us how to protect ourselves during a nuclear attack.

It was a terrifying read right from the menacing first page: ‘Read this booklet with care. Your life and the lives of your family may depend upon it.’

Things got no happier over the next 30 pages, which suggested how to build a fallout room and an inner refuge that we could stay in for two weeks and what food to stock.

The details got steadily grimmer, including special ‘sanitation arrangements’ and what to do if someone dies. Envy them, I suppose.

And I don’t think that’s changed much in the intervening decades.

If you found yourself outdoors as the mushroom cloud went up, you were advised to ‘lie flat (in a ditch) and cover the exposed skin of the head and hands’. 

People who lived in bungalows were warned that their homes would ‘not give much protection’, while those who dwelt in caravans were told, with weapons-grade dismissiveness, that ‘your local authority will be able to advise you on what to do’.

I read the booklet in 1984 as an 11-year-old, shortly after I watched Threads, the terrifyingly brilliant BBC film about nuclear war. That film traumatised me and made me determined that the horrific scenes would never come true.

So I joined the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) to try and stop a nuclear war and I read Protect and Survive to try and work out what to do if there was one.

My parents were a bit surprised when I suddenly covered my clothes in CND badges, spiked my hair up and began to spend my Saturday afternoons at peace demos rather than football matches. They were absolutely horrified when I started unscrewing the living room door.

It would be easy to say that Protect and Survive did nothing positive for me but it did. Its laughably futile advice taught me at an early age that, when push comes to shove, our rulers won’t be able to save us and we’ll have to look after ourselves. 

I’ll always be grateful for that wake-up call.

But I can trace back a disaster document scaring me even further.

I was six years old when I went on my first flight and it was quite a debut: a 24-hour flight to Australia. 

There was little inflight entertainment in those days – just a couple of films broadcast at a set time on a screen far away.

I got so bored and the only thing handy to distract me was an illustrated booklet explaining what to do if the plane crashed. 

The more I looked at the cold illustrations of oxygen masks, life rafts, people whizzing down chutes from a mangled jet, or bobbing around in the sea with only a whistle to protect them, the more my boredom turned into terror.

At six years of age, I was old enough to understand the horror of what the illustrations were depicting but not old enough to grasp that, even though we were being warned what to do if the plane crashed, that didn’t mean the plane would crash, nor that it was even likely to.

Even when I read Protect and Survive five years later I wasn’t sassy or resigned enough to understand the obvious truth that, if you find yourself under nuclear attack or in a serious plane crash, the best thing to do in either scenario might be just to simply die.

I felt more scared than informed, but maybe that’s part of the point of this sudden rush of survival manuals in Europe. 

A population that’s unsettled and on a war footing against an unspecified and unexplained threat might be more malleable and forgiving of their rulers’ performance. So maybe they’re trying to protect us, but maybe they’re trying to scare us, too.

That said, many people’s lives have been saved by following the advice in air safety briefings, and while the tips in the European manuals may seem obvious to you and me, there’s nothing wrong with being prepared, and they could save people’s lives in these precarious times we live in.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.

I saved for retirement – why should I be penalised?

I had a low-paid job and chose to pay into a company pension that would top
up my state one, while some of my colleagues chose to opt out and spend the money rather than save for old age.

And now you think I should give up my state pension. Why? It was their choice.

Also what do disability benefits have to do with it? I’m pretty sure if we can find billions to help Ukraine, there’s money in the government pot. Jane Smith, Islington

Should the state pension go only to those who need it?

Ryan raises an important debate. The state pension should be means-tested so that, in addition to reducing the welfare bill, the money is targeted at those who really need it.

And to those who claim the state pension is a ‘right’ because they have paid national insurance all their lives – ‘insurance’ is the operative word here.

People could reflect on the fact that we pay house and contents insurance, motor insurance and holiday insurance most, if not all, of our working lives – but don’t expect anything back if we don’t need to claim.

The welfare state is there to protect those in our society who really need help through no fault of their own so that they can live fulfilling worry-free lives.
Julian, London

Yes, I deserve my pension and I bet you’ll claim yours too

How dare Ryan suggest cutting the state pension? Whether we need it or not is of no concern to him.

When we were younger, we saved when and where we could, supposedly for a rainy day. Do our youngsters do this today? I think not.

I would suspect a huge chunk of money is thrown at people suffering from ‘mental health issues’, these apparently over-diagnosed by doctors.

Some of these people are teenagers capable of a day’s work. We pensioners who might have a bit put by are entitled to our pension, never mind whether we need it or not.

Yes, I certainly deserve my pension ahead of benefit claimants. It’s my guess many are disabled through lack of exercise. We have ‘earned’ our pensions so, Ryan Cooper, however old you are, be sensible about this.

I can bet you’ll be claiming yours when you are entitled to it. If you are of the age to receive it, have you declined it? Mary T, Halifax

Australia mean tests pensions – but it’s not that simple

Australia does have a means-tested state pension (actually a benefit paid to the less well off).

However this runs in tandem with a compulsory superannuation scheme, to which the employer is now obliged to contribute 12 per cent of salary. I imagine this, and the accompanying tax breaks on both the employer and employee contribution, mitigate the resentment from those feeling they are being punished for saving for their old age.
Jonathan Bagley, Todmorden

Is society teaching kids to be bullies?

One in ten parents living in poverty say their children have been bullied as a result, according to a poll (Metro, Mon).

As much as financial struggles may affect children’s behaviour, I don’t think it’s the major factor.

We are living in a culture of bullying from top down. Bullying rulers, bullying managers, reality programmes endorsing bullying and giving guidelines on who and how to bully. Some examples include Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, The Apprentice and other competitive reality TV shows.

TV dramas such as 13 Reasons Why and Adolescence give you an idea of what
I mean. It’s not surprising it’s trickling down to the children.
VSL, Secondary School Teacher,
Inner London

The White House leak shows what America really thinks

The scandal of White House security advisor Mike Waltz leaking war plans to a journalist on a messaging service and which showed US leaders describing Europeans as ‘pathetic’ (Metro, Wed), gives a glimpse into the American psyche.

They are scared of liberalism as it destroys their power. Europe needs to hold to its values. Neil Dance, Birmingham

Solitary confinement? Tommy Robinson should count himself lucky

Tommy Robinson is challenging being held in prison isolation (Metro, Fri). He should think himself fortunate – the luxury of his own cell, separated from all the noise, arguments, stains and odours of shared cellular accommodation.

He should be grateful prison authorities are trying to keep him safe – they say a ‘lifer’ had threatened to kill him.
I’d prefer to serve a sentence in solitary, so long as I could obtain books, magazines and a radio and if kind-hearted prison officers were to bring in copies of Metro.

And as someone who hasn’t watched TV for 40 years, I’d regard it as some form of torture if I had to share a cell with a telly blaring away all day.
Not too bad perhaps if it were Talking Pictures TV, BBC and Sky Arts but I suspect they would not be available. Michael Zehse, London

Click here to order a print or call 0191 6030178

MORE: I watched the Spring Statement – this is what it means for you

MORE: Five key takeaways from Rachel Reeves’ Spring Statement – from welfare to defence

MORE: Rachel Reeves says she took free Sabrina Carpenter tickets for security reasons

Over the last decade and a half, life in this country has become much harder.

All of us bar the richest can’t have failed to notice. The cost of everyday essentials and bills have soared.  

Rents are spiralling, with renters handing over more and more of their pay packet to their landlord every month.

The price of energy bills, due to increase again from next week, is forcing families to choose between feeding their families and heating their homes.   

Meanwhile, the things communities rely on to thrive have been stripped away. Our health service is on its knees, with patients being treated on trolleys in hospital corridors while our schools are crumbling.  

It couldn’t be clearer: the legacy of 14 years of austerity under the Conservatives has left us a poorer, sicker and less resilient country.   

You might think, then, a Labour government elected on a mantra of ‘change’ would be determined to turn things around – to repair the deep damage done to our economy, and heal our communities.   

But in today’s Spring Statement from the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves showed a shocking determination to instead double down on the last government’s failed austerity experiment, and their own figures show hundreds of thousands of people will be pushed into poverty by her plans.  

We’ve already seen this government remove winter fuel payments from a million pensioners, and refuse to scrap the cruel two-child benefit cap.   

We already knew that Reeves planned to strip billions of pounds of support away from those who could least afford it – pushing hundreds of thousands of disabled people further below the breadline. 

But on top of that, today, the chancellor announced further cuts, slashing the health element of Universal Credit, an additional payment for those with limited capacity for work, by 50% for new claimants, then freezing it. 

That is a devastating blow for disabled people seeking the support they need, especially given the spiralling cost of living.  

And it comes on top of news that at least 800,000 people will lose out on Personal Independence Payments, a benefit paid to those with long-term health conditions. 

Meanwhile, military spending gets a multi-billion pound boost, exposing as false the idea that we can’t afford to support those who need it. 

Why is it that this government can find money to potentially bomb people, but not find money to actually help people?  

Reeves’ announcements mean that overall, government spending will be cut in real terms from what was previously planned – signalling a return to austerity. 

Reeves seems to have no interest in investing in our communities, supporting vulnerable people, or revitalising our economy. Instead, she’s following in the footsteps of George Osborne with a programme of deep cuts to the services this country relies on.   

This is a staggering move from a Labour chancellor.  

It’s clear that austerity failed on every measure, not only immiserating millions of people around the country, cutting short our life expectancy and raising children who literally grow up smaller than their European peers – but grinding our economy to a halt. 

It wouldn’t be shocking to see a Conservative in denial about that, but to see Labour backing swingeing cuts feels like ‘meet the new boss, same as the old boss.’ 

We are deep in a hole created by 15 years of government neglect – and Reeves is proposing that we keep digging, maintaining the endless cycle of decline that put us in this position in the first place.    

We know what the result will be, because we’ve seen it all before.  

Disabled people across the country are already terrified of the impact that welfare cuts will have on them – many facing cutting back on essentials, losing their homes, or struggling to carry out everyday activities.  

The government’s own assessment of the impact of their welfare cuts shows that they will plunge 250,000 people into poverty – including, unforgivably, 50,000 children.  

Hundreds of my constituents have written to me to share their stories, and urge me to do something about these awful cuts. 

These people are despairing at the thought that this support could be stripped away from them – worsening their health, removing their independence and cutting them off from their communities. 

Let’s be clear – this is a choice, and there is another way.   

While most people in this country have seen their wages stagnate over the last 15 years, their bills go up and their living costs rise, there’s another group who have had quite a different experience.   

In 2024, the UK’s billionaires were estimated to have increased their collective wealth by a staggering £35million every day.  

The last government presided over an enormous upwards transfer of wealth – from ordinary people to those who profit from workers’ labour, who pocket renters’ money, and who stash their cash abroad in tax havens while the government shrugs its shoulders and says there’s simply no money left.   

It’s time to put an end to that – to make sure that work really pays, that everyone in this country gets the support they need, and that the super-wealthy pay their fair share along with the rest of us.   

This week figures showed that nearly 8 in 10 members of the public back a wealth tax – a 2% tax on assets above £10 million which could raise £24 billion a year for our public services.   

Up and down the UK people are crying out for a new direction. Last night I spoke at a rally outside the Treasury bringing together people from all walks of life to demand that the government scrap cruel welfare cuts and instead tax wealth fairly.  

There’s even growing discomfort on the government’s own benches that Starmer and Reeves have so quickly ditched the pledges they made to improve people’s lives in this country.  

Pressure is growing for the government to change course and make the changes we really need – to tax wealth fairly, and invest in our society.  

For easier access to GPs, dentists and hospital appointments where you can get the care you need when you need it, and schools where parents know their kids are getting the education they deserve. 

For decent jobs that pay a good wage, and protection for our natural world.   

All of this is possible if the government chooses – but after the missed opportunity of today, the signs aren’t good.   

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

I love my country. There, I said it. 

And no, I’m not a frothing racist or a far-right activist. I’m not even a Conservative. 

I’m a patriot. I’m proud of my country – and you should be too. 

For too long, patriotism in Britain has been hijacked, and I am sick to the deepest pit in my stomach of cringing every time a far-right thug or opportunistic political voice drapes themselves in the Union Flag, weaponises our national symbols and whitewashes our heritage. 

From Tommy Robinson to Laurence Fox and Nigel Farage, these faux patriots use red, white and blue bunting as a backdrop for division. They have twisted British patriotism into a cheap political prop to slam the other side with.

Yet, I am equally frustrated with the liberal left who wince at the thought of patriotism – or worse still, shame me for loving our country.

If we surrender our country and flag to the far-right, the negative consequences will impact us all. 

I am everything you’ve been warned about: a liberal, pro-European, anti-Trump, anti-Putin, wokerati, DEI-supporting, internationalist, vegetarian lefty. (Phew, I think I got them all in there.) 

But I’m also an unashamed patriot who is proud of his nation and will sometimes even go so far as to say the UK might be the greatest country in the world.

The problem today is that being a patriot has become synonymous with narrow-minded nationalism and far-right extremism. 

It’s been lumped together with xenophobic slogans, exclusionary politics and misplaced declinism. 

Being proud of our country is my right – and boy, do we have some things to be proud of. 

Throughout history, in almost every field – from health to science and transport to human rights – we have led the way. 

It was Manchester scientist Alan Turing whose groundbreaking work cracking the Nazis’ Enigma code helped bring the Second World War to an early end – saving countless lives and laying the foundations for modern computing.

And he’s hardly the only Brit to transform the world – I barely need to mention Stephen Hawking, Charles Darwin, Jane Austen or William Shakespeare.

We kickstarted public transport, invented the World Wide Web, revolutionised nursing and changed science forever.

We pushed boundaries and built a legacy of courage, creativity, and conviction that can only be found on our tiny island.

Even now, we don’t just contribute to global culture and sport – we define it. Britain’s football clubs are adored everywhere, and our music has reached every inch of the planet.

Big-screen icons like James Bond, Harry Potter and Wallace & Gromit have captivated audiences worldwide and, with series like Doctor Who, Sherlock and The Crown, our television is undeniably the gold standard.

We have a strong public sector, a fair justice system, high animal welfare standards, and fundamental rights like same-sex marriage and safe, legal abortion are non-negotiable. 

When Britain shows up, we don’t just participate – we lead. 

I’m immensely proud of our history of defending neighbours in times of crisis and welcoming those in need. 

When Hitler invaded Poland, over 400,000 Brits made the ultimate sacrifice to defeat fascism.

When Putin invaded Ukraine, we didn’t even take a breath before picking a side. Brits opened their arms, taking in over 200,000 refugees and now we are leading the ‘Coalition of the Willing’, working flat out to secure Ukraine’s victory through aid, funding and military support.

Yet, there’s no denying our past is complicated. I acknowledge and regret the injustices wrought by the British Empire, the deplorable legacy of the transatlantic slave trade, and the prejudices that prevailed in our society. 

I know that for many people – particularly those of ethnic minority descent – the horror of Britain’s past, and the inequalities that persist today, make it difficult to feel pride in our country.

That discomfort is valid and modern patriotism must make space for that uncomfortable truth, because we are not perfect today.

I don’t believe in continued British expansionism and the hangover of the Empire still wreaks havoc today – right on our doorstep.

I continue to find the partition of Ireland deeply troubling – a century-old conflict where British rule in the North remains contested, power-sharing is fragile, and a fictional border drawn by Westminster still fuels division.

I find it entirely unsurprising that former colonies like Barbados want to cut ties with us completely.

But my ability to hold multiple truths at once – pride in our national story and sorrow for the darker elements of its past, and sadly sometimes its present – reflects a maturity that all Britons, particularly those on the left, must learn to embrace.

It’s time to forge a new era of patriotism, in which democracy, the rule of law, compassion and the embrace of diversity are our undeniable bedrock.

At its core, the United Kingdom is a reflective, compassionate, forward-looking country. 

Those of us on the liberal left and sensible right have a responsibility to make it better, not surrender it to those who peddle division and nostalgia for a past that never truly existed. 

When the world sees the Union Flag, it should be a proud projection of shared hope, responsibility and democracy, not a symbol of exclusion and division.

But it’s on all of us to make that symbolism a fact.  

Patriotism is not anyone’s to weaponise, and it shouldn’t be anyone’s to abandon. I’m proud of my country, and I refuse to let anyone take that from me. 

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.

Gen Z’s struggles are no joke

‘We said we wouldn’t go back to how things were and we haven’t – it’s got worse.’
I’m Gen X but can totally understand the disillusion of Gen Z – struggling to get on the property ladder, landlords ripping you off, a world full of plenty and yet all seemingly owned by a tiny few…

All this coming after living through a global lockdown, where we all saw what was really important in life and who were really essential.

We said we wouldn’t go back to how things were and we haven’t – it’s got worse. Those essential workers are treated worse than before, the wealth gap gets bigger. It’s like the end of Monopoly – all the money going in one direction to one person, the rest of us struggling to get round to reach the next payment. It’s at this point no one wants to play anymore. This is the plight of Gen Z. Stuart, Dagenham

‘Mental health’ or misdiagnosed physical condition?

‘I figured out that the modern environment caused my misery’
Over-diagnosis of mental illness – as described by health secretary Wes Streeting (MetroTalk, Mon) – can be catastrophic.

I suffered from crushing fatigue for many years, which was never recognised as a physical condition –instead, I was diagnosed with mental health issues, which exacerbated the situation catastrophically.

I figured out that the modern environment caused my misery – windowless or dim rooms plus glaring lamps and screens.

I am quite fit now and feel as if I have come back from the dead.

I reckon that ‘mental health’ is abused on a vast scale to cover up physical illness and inhumane living and working conditions. Christina Egan, Tottenham

Gen Z can’t DIY

‘he should be embarrassed and so should his parents’
I’m laughing so much over 22-year-old part-time law student Sam Daley, who paid £180 to have his carbon monoxide alarm batteries changed because he and his generation have
no DIY skills (Metro, Mon). You couldn’t make it up – he should be embarrassed and so should his parents for not supplying him with the basic knowledge of DIY, or do they themselves not know how to do these things? Changing a battery, putting up a shelf – which Sam says he’s also unable to do – are the simplest of things. Debs, London

Is freedom of speech really under threat?

‘your opinion is in a national newspaper’
Alan (MetroTalk, Tue) laments about how the country is ‘broken’ and him not having ‘freedom of speech’.

The very fact you had your opinion in a national newspaper rubbishes any argument you have about losing your ‘freedom of speech’.

People like Alan love to victimise themselves, yet their arguments rarely, if ever, bring anything thoughtful or original to the table.

Please, give it a rest with the whole ‘freedom of speech’ nonsense – visit a country where freedom of speech really is limited and you’ll surely get some perspective. One of the most damaging problems our society faces is not being able to properly balance emotion with logic.

It ultimately creates more problems instead of solutions and leads to weaponised ignorance that has real-world consequences for others. Rob, South Shields

Should pet owners pay the price for the destruction their animals cause?

‘£200 per pet, that’ll clear our fiscal deficit’
Many will agree with Richard (MetroTalk, Tue), who says there should be a dog licence of £50.

Perhaps in view of the number of irresponsible owners it should be £200. I would add that cat owners should also pay £200 per cat in view of the carnage their pets cause – more than 50million birds and 200million animals are killed by cats every year.

There are 13.5million dogs and 12.5million cats in the UK so that would clear our fiscal deficit. Clark Cross, Linlithgow

Pot holes are just a symptom – what about the roads?

‘Electric vehicles will only make the situation worse’
It is commendable for the government to provide £1.6billion for pothole repairs (Metro, Mon) but shouldn’t people be asking for resurfacing of our roads? The potholes are happening on roads with thin surfaces, particularly roads used by
a variety of heavy vehicles. The increase in electric vehicles, which
are very heavy, will only make the situation worse if resurfacing is not going to be considered. Grahame King, Leicester.

The rise of fancy job titles

Further to Delboy’s letter about fanciful job titles (MetroTalk, Mon),
I have heard that in the US, undertakers are sometimes referred
to as ‘grief therapists’.

In the 60s, my late dad jokingly used to call bin men not ‘environmental executives’ but ‘dusthole mechanics’. Nick Spokes, Ilford

Why do cashiers always ask about loyalty cards?

‘Staff have to ask’
In response to Glen Purcell (MetroTalk, Mon) bemoaning ‘childlike’ shoppers needing to be asked whether they have loyalty cards.

Staff have to ask because the till will not let them continue with the transaction until they have said ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the customer having one. Kim Redding, Hornchurch

The hidden hazard of escalators that no one talks about

‘TfL seemingly refuses to announce’
On ‘nannyish’ public transport announcements (MetroTalk, Mon), there is one specific incident that TfL seemingly refuses to announce around the station.

I work in the station and it is
very common for ladies wearing exaggerated, long gowns to be trapped on the escalators.

The incidents sometimes do involve other customers when these ladies
fall or lose their balance on the escalators. They should raise it up before stepping on escalators. C Ukeje, Woolwich

Comedy and philosophy

‘I laughed more than I thought.’
I went to a class mixing comedy
and philosophy. I laughed more than
I thought. Jeff, Nuneaton

Click here to order a print or call 0191 6030178