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.

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.

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.

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.

After six episodes of ‘will they won’t they?’ between brothers Lochlan and Saxon, The White Lotus has gone there.

It takes a lot to shock someone who writes about television for a living but The White Lotus is trying its very best with… incest.

From the get-go of the third season of Mike White’s ludicrously camp whodunnit, the sexual tension has been palpable – between brothers Saxon (Patrick Schwarzenegger) and Lochlan Ratliff (Sam Nivola).

Saxon is a hypersexual, hyper-masculine ‘finance bro’ determined to rid his sheepish younger brother of his virginity during their family trip to Thailand, specifically with some girls they’ve spotted at their resort, The White Lotus.

During their first night sharing a room, Saxon is horny. He can’t stop talking about how horny he is. In fact he’s so unbearable horny that, mid-conversation with his brother, he has to masturbate immediately.

He dashes to the bathroom, leaving the door suspiciously ajar to jerk off in front of Lochlan who is transfixed, staring at his brother’s penis for much longer than could possibly be an accident.

The latest episode, on the way back from Thailand’s infamous Full Moon Party, the brothers got drunk and took part in a threesome with a girl called Chloe on her boyfriend’s luxury yacht.

The next morning, battling the worst hangovers, hazy memories of the night began to break through the cobwebs.

It happened. Lochlan had given his older brother a hand job while making out with Chloe.

Since the episode’s release, viewers have threatened to boycott and said the storyline has gone ‘too far’.

The White Lotus has never been a wallflower – and I don’t really have an issue with tackling incest. But does it have to be done with gay undertones?

Incest is having its moment. Jaime and Cersei Lannister set the trend in Game of Thrones and just last year Ryan Murphy’s Monsters: Eric and Lyle Menendez showed the titular homoerotic killer brothers showering together.

For better or worse, television is there to cover taboo issues – and to be clear, I am thoroughly enjoying The White Lotus season 3. It’s debaucherously mischievous and if it’s the most fun we’ll have on television this year then great – I’ll go into 2026 toasting another satisfying year of TV.

But according to The White Lotus, gay men have two things in common – we’re either perverts or we want to kill Jennifer Coolidge, or both. In reality, I like to think most of us have more depth and would quite literally die for Jennifer Coolidge.

And of the many couples who have checked into The White Lotus for a romantic getaway, not one of them has been LGBTQ+ – at least, not openly.

The first time The White Lotus showed gay sex, it was punchy, unapologetic and genuinely felt ground-breaking with hotel manager Armond (Murray Bartlett) aggressively rimming staff member Dillon (Lukas Gage). It was great work all around to see that level of gay sex on a television series not specifically categorised as LGBTQ+.

Then season two came – where, once again, there was a gay sex scene clearly intended to rock the boat when Tanya (Jennifer Coolidge) caught Jack (Leo Woodall) hooking up with the man believed to be his uncle, Quentin (Tom Holland).

It transpired that Jack and Quentin had been lying to lure Tanya on to a luxury yacht and dump her body in the sea. The storyline was a work of art and produced one of the most meme-able moments in living memory with the killer line: ‘These gays, they’re trying to murder me.’

But, while it was unmissable television, there was a slight discomfort that gays were reduced to being horny killers without any conscience – and that, once again, sex between two men was clearly used for shock value.

Then just a couple of weeks ago, the sun rose on The White Lotus again and alluded that, if there is more gay sex this series, it’s going to be between two brothers.

The White Lotus is the brainchild of openly bisexual former reality star-turned TV guru Mike White. I’m sure his intentions are good, that more gay representation is a wonderful thing – and that’s true, of course.

Granted, no one comes off great in The White Lotus with the exception of hotel manager Belinda Lindsey (Natasha Rothwell). Everyone is deeply troubled and their greed, trauma and absurdity is what makes The White Lotus so irresistible.

But there’s a distinct trend around the wrongness of its gay characters, which always boils down to sex – in a way that it doesn’t with straight guests and staff of various The White Lotus resorts around the world.

This season, could The White Lotus have confronted incest with a brother and sister? Easily.

Not to mention, there are so many fascinating dynamics this season alone that don’t revolve around sex. The three best friends who can’t resist bitching about one another as soon as one of them is out of the room; the blossoming romance between a security guard and another hotel staff member; the couple with an age-gap.

None of these relationships are driven by sex – or at least it’s not the sex that makes them interesting – but all of them could have been storylines revolving around LGBTQ+ characters.

White could easily throw us a bone and not a boner, but every single time it’s the latter.

After three seasons of The White Lotus now, it’s a trend which isn’t just becoming a bit tedious – there is also significant potential to cause so much more harm than good to our community, which is already being demonised as perverts and paedophiles without any rhyme or reason by the loud and increasingly powerful right-wing.

Right now, is a gay incest storyline particularly helpful? No. It’s not even particularly entertaining.

Of all the things to love about this series of The White Lotus – which is essentially every single woman in it – the potential for gay incest is right at the bottom of the list.

I really do love The White Lotus; but if White could write gay men and give them the same respect he does to women, it would be the perfect TV show.

Perhaps in season four, we’ll get there – because if not, reluctantly, I might have to check out of The White Lotus.

The White Lotus is available to stream on NOW.

A version of this article was originally published February 27, 2025

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, 

My fiance and I met in alcohol recovery meetings, so we are both sober. Now our wedding is coming up, so we’re facing the question of whether to serve alcohol or not.

It’s important to us to have the wedding that we want, and when you’re sober, being around a load of drunk people isn’t that much fun! Some of our guests are in recovery too, and we want them to have a good time, especially the ones that haven’t been sober that long and find being around booze hard. 

However, a lot of our friends and relatives do drink alcohol and we want them to have a good time as well. Besides that, some don’t know that my fiancé and I are recovering addicts so having a tee-total wedding will raise a lot of questions. 

There are loads of good non-alcoholic drinks now, and a big rise in people who are just sober out of choice, but weddings seem to be the one event when alcohol is always expected and there is quite a lot at stake personally. How can we have a wedding that’s right for us and fun for all our guests? 

Thanks, 

L.B. 

Dear L.B. 

First of all, congratulations on your upcoming wedding! 

It’s wonderful that you and your fiancé are building a life together based on shared values – including sobriety. 

It’s completely understandable to have concerns about how your decision to have an alcohol-free wedding will be received – but remember, this is your special day and should reflect what makes you both happy and comfortable. The last thing you want is to feel anxious or on edge. 

Your idea of a tee-total wedding is not as unusual as it once was – more and more couples are making the same choice, whether for personal, health, or religious reasons. 

At our venue, we’ve hosted several booze-free weddings. 

Several years ago, for example, one group in the wedding party did not drink alcohol due to religious beliefs, while the other did. To accommodate both, we created a simple solution: A curtain was put up so that alcohol was not visible to those who did not drink it, and all alcoholic drinks were poured from behind the curtain. 

We have also hosted weddings where none was served at all. It was never an issue, and that was down to clear communication with all the guests before the wedding. 

Each wedding focused on celebrating the couple’s love, and the guests had a wonderful time. 

And as you’ve mentioned, the world of alcohol-free drinks has expanded tremendously. 

From non-alcoholic gins, beers, and wines to beautifully crafted mocktails, your guests won’t need to miss out on the ‘celebratory’ feel of a drink in hand. In fact, many of them may even appreciate the variety and creativity that come with a well-thought-out, soft drink menu. 

But mocktails notwithstanding, one of your biggest concerns seems to be how to navigate this decision with guests who don’t know about your recovery – and so it might be worth considering using your wedding to let everyone know you’re sober (you don’t have to tell them why). 

It is essential to communicate clearly with all your guests – and this way, friends or relatives who might have otherwise handed you a glass of champagne, a shot or suggested a toast, won’t unknowingly put you in an awkward position. 

They will also understand your decision not to serve any booze on the day and will – hopefully – be supportive of that. 

Whether you choose to share your reasons or not, if you let people know in advance that your wedding will be alcohol-free, it sets the expectation early and allows your friends and family to plan accordingly. Some might appreciate the opportunity to drive home instead of booking accommodation or arranging alternative transport. 

With regard to how your drinking guests will feel, remember that a wedding is about much more than drinking. Good food, great music, and joyful company make a celebration unique. 

If your wedding is full of love and laughter (and maybe some fun mocktails!), your guests will have a fantastic time. 

Ultimately, you and your fiancé should prioritise what feels right for you. 

If an alcohol-free wedding matches your values and helps create a safe, fun space for you and your loved ones in recovery, then go for it with confidence. 

Your guests aren’t just anyone. They are the people closest to you who will genuinely care about you, respect your decision, and support it – and who will be there to celebrate your love and commitment on the day. 

Wishing you a beautiful and joy-filled wedding, filled with love, laughter, and the celebration of your shared values! 

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.

Anyone who spends £600 on cheesy chips surely deserves to be banished to galaxy far, far, away – but there’s a reality television series where contestants think they’ve found a bargain.

Tempting Fortune is two episodes into its second series, two years after flying relatively under the radar when it first launched in 2023.

Hosted by Paddy McGuinnes, 12 strangers are thrown together for a gruelling 18-day hike in the sweltering Malaysian jungle.

They begin their trip with £300,000 and keeping the entire prize fund sounds simple: Don’t spend £200 on a can of Fanta.

During the trek, each individual is confronted with the same temptation at checkpoints, which they can either accept or reject. But accepting comes at a financial cost to everyone.

As someone who refuses to accept the 20% price hike of a Mayo Chicken in McDonald’s, I have never been more certain about something: I would be strong enough to resist splashing out £700 on a Dairy Milk.

Or would I be?

After spending days hiking in unbearable 40-degree heat, being attacked by leeches and sleeping on the floor, wouldn’t I deserve a treat?

That’s the inner turmoil faced by each and everyone of the 12 strangers.

Well, some find it easier than others – and that’s what makes Tempting Fortune the stroke of genius that should be held in the same esteem as reality television greats, The Traitors, Big Brother and my personal favourite, The Circle.

Their level of will-power ranges from the restaurant owner whose business just collapsed and won’t even look in the direction of a chocolate bar, to a millionaire entrepreneur who will happily gobble down on a tiny hamper of sugary snacks for £750.

It is genuinely the most fascinating social experiment since Nasty Nick introduced game-playing to reality television.

It doesn’t take long before players have established who is out for themselves and who has any grasp of the concept of teamwork. Within hours of meeting, there are rows, the level of which haven’t been aired on television since the heyday of explosive reality TV such as Wife Swap, Supernanny and the criminally underrated Mob Wives.

It’s packed with bolshy personalities determined to start a war from the get-go.

In this series, in one corner you have fashion blogger Imani who believes life is about experiences, no matter the price tag. She relishes in spending a grand on a few minutes of air conditioning and is weirdly delighted when others follow her indulgent lead.

In the other corner you have Sam, who treats anyone who even hints at falling for temptation like they’ve kicked a puppy and is determined to make it to the end with the prize pot completely intact.  

The cast is dynamite.

Torn between Sam and Imani is 37-year-old vicar David, who’s entire life has revolved around resisting temptation, but can’t wait to throw away the dog collar for three weeks and splurge like he’s never splurged before.

Among the 12 contestants there are heroes like Henry, a deaf amateur footballer, determined to prove is more capable than he’s given credit for; Welsh retired prison officer Ted, who bravely embarks on one of the biggest physical challenges of his life; and 59-year-old paramedic Trish, who wants to show age is just a number and anything men can do, women can do better.

The pack start off united but gradually they’re divided between natural-born emperors of the game Imani and Sam.

The gluttonous players tuck into extraordinarily overpriced beige food, initially with guilt and trepidation, before ordering £400 pints of Guinness like it’s a badge of honour.

It’s as primal as reality television gets in 2025.

It exposes the divide between rich and poor, left and right, strong and the weak more than anything else I’ve ever seen.

The Traitors is clearly the biggest water-cooler television since The X Factor at its peak, and thank god for it, too.

For the first three weeks of January my main personality is Traitors.

I think about nothing else between each episode and feel constantly on edge knowing there’s shock coming my way at 9pm every Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

I never feel more alive than when the entire nation is completely gripped by cliff-hanger and we’re collectively in agony waiting for its resolution.

The star of The Traitors is always the game, the cast is almost secondary. This year we saw Minah Shannon carry the first two-thirds of the series entirely on her shoulders; the only cast member likeable enough to be deemed a worthy winner.

‘Weirdly even though we were out before Traitors, I find some of the stuff on Traitors similar to what we are doing,’ says Paddy.

I’m not sure I see the resemblance myself, other than both take staggering turns out of nowhere, but I agree they’re both equally as fun.

But Tempting Fortune is a fascinating anthropological experiment with a cast so extreme it’s hard to believe they were put on this planet to serve any purpose other than striking gold for Channel 4.

Imani is up there with the most iconic reality TV villains like Christine Quinn, Janice Dickinson and Kim Woodburn, living in a one-woman world, which is unbearable to be around but a godsend to watch.

A true firestarter who gives zero attention to anyone else’s cares or concerns.

If more people were switched on to Tempting Fortune it would be another landmark moment in reality television and it deserves to be a massive talker.

Its second series launched to just 700,000 viewers, which is less than a tenth of those who tuned into The Traitors.

That means there’s at least 10,000,000 reality TV fans longing for something to fill The Traitors void and they’re missing out on the one reality TV series we have that deserves to be championed just as hard, if not harder.

It’s not even acknowledged for NTAs, a Bafta – even the TV Choice Awards gave Tempting Fortune the cold shoulder. It might be a pipedream to beat the likes of Strictly or Traitors but at the very least it deserves the nomination.

The dizzy heights of a new format like The Traitors is unheard of, it’s enormous viewing figures are somewhat of a miracle in the last dying breaths of linear TV.  

Tempting Fortune is unlikely to ever be as successful, but it absolutely should be before it’s discarded as another forgotten reality TV show that deserved more.

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.

Looking up at my boyfriend last week, I bit my lip as I tried to hold back a moan.

We were in the middle of sex and every thrust made me want to scream out in pleasure.

He knows exactly which buttons to push and boy, does he enjoy pushing them.

But there was a problem: We were not alone in the house.

A good friend of mine was sound asleep and gently snoring in the next room.

I hadn’t actually intended to have sex while my mate was visiting, in fact I’d consider it rude.

But my boyfriend and I have both been very busy with work as of late, and sex has taken a backseat.

So when he walked into our room that night in just a towel, I couldn’t resist.

What started out as an innocent make-out session soon turned into a full-blown shag fest.

And so, there I was – trying desperately not to wake my mate, who was none the wiser to our sexy activities.

I hadn’t even considered the power of silent sex, but this was a different level of pleasure.

It’s not in my nature to be quiet but the fact that I couldn’t give in to my urges was only making the sex more intense.

When he noticed that I was approaching orgasm, he gently put his hand over my mouth in an effort to help.

I can’t quite describe why but this gesture sent a shiver down my spine. 

Moments later, my orgasm arrived, and it was unbelievable. 

And it got me thinking about how quieter sex doesn’t mean bad sex – in fact, it was quite the opposite. 

When I was younger, I made the mistake of thinking that being loud automatically meant things were going great in bed.  

To naïve, sexually inexperienced me, being noisy in the sack was a way to show my lovers just how much fun I was having. 

Besides, every porn film I’d ever seen always included extremely noisy women.

At the time, I didn’t fully realise that these sounds were for the viewer, not the people having sex on screen.

I didn’t have any outright When Harry Met Sally loud faking moments myself, but I’ll admit, I certainly exaggerated from time to time. 

And it took me years to realise that silence can actually be a huge turn-on.

A few years ago, I was at a friend’s garden party, where I met Sam*.  

We were both single and had an instant connection. 

As the temperature dropped, the rest of the group went inside and knowingly left us to get more acquainted. This was our chance. 

Sam grabbed my hand and we snuck away to the other side of the garden, which was conveniently located away from any prying eyes.

Holding me against the wall with one hand, he let his other hand wander under my skirt. 

To me, silence during sex isn’t actually about volume, but control

Soon enough, I was panting against his shoulder.

‘Sssh, you have to stay quiet,’ he whispered, as I tried my best not to moan out loud.

Being forced to remain quiet was a sort of painful pleasure, but it only made the experience hotter.

Another time, I was in bed at home with my date, Henry*, when the phone rang. 

Not long into my conversation with a friend, I noticed a naughty look in Henry’s eyes.

As I gabbered on with the person on the other side of the line, he started kissing my neck.

My breath caught in my throat.

This all happened in a matter of seconds and my brain needed a moment to catch up.

My friend was sharing juicy gossip but I was afraid to open my mouth, in case a moan came out.

‘Ehm, I’m sorry, I have to go… do something quickly. I’ll call you back in a bit,’ I uttered before tossing the phone aside.

The sex that followed was explosive.

To me, silence during sex isn’t actually about volume, but control. 

Rather, I am instinctively a pretty loud person so having to hold back or be quiet is a challenge – and I think that’s part of why I like it so much.

The idea of getting caught is also a big turn-on and a fairly common fantasy for many people.

Though, I’ll admit; fooling around with someone while your mate is on the phone, or in a friend’s garden, is not considerate behaviour. I wouldn’t do it again and it’s not something I recommend you try, either.

But having silent sex on purpose can actually be a great way to spice things up.

For instance, I once teased a lover by telling him that if he made a peep while I was pleasuring him, I’d stop.

We both enjoyed this ‘game’ – I loved seeing his face contort as he tried to keep his expression neutral.

You could use toys to lower the volume as well; I once tried a ball gag but it wasn’t for me. 

Perhaps you’ll like it better than I did.

Just be careful and discuss boundaries first.

Or, if you’re usually quiet during sex, perhaps try something that isn’t your speed and be a little louder next time.

You might be surprised by how much difference noise – or the lack of it – can make in the bedroom.

And how much you enjoy it.

*Names have been changed

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.

Incredible. Absolutely shaking. Utterly mesmerising.

Just some of the phrases I have seen attributed to EastEnders king Steve McFadden, aka legendary TV character Phil Mitchell.

It’s impossible to even question it. In fact, he’s not just one of EastEnders’ finest actors – he’s one of the best in Britain by a long chalk.

You don’t have to have seen a single episode of EastEnders to know who Phil Mitchell is.

Steve has always played menacing yet vulnerable, angry yet funny incredibly well.

He is a well deserved stalwart of the show and Walford is unimaginable without him.

It’s never been in doubt already that he shatters the stereotypical sceptcism and snobbery around soap actors.

But recently, at the centre of a depression and psychosis story for his alter-ego, Steve has really shown what he is made of.

Many in the UK can relate to mental health struggles in some way, with statistics around male suicide incredibly high.

In a slow burn storyline, commencing before most viewers even clicked there was anything wrong with Phil, he has sunk into loneliness and despair.

He has cut himself off from family, fallen into hermit-like behaviour and found his house becoming messy.

He has had a tough life, often of his own making. In the most recent episode, which explored his four weeks in a mental health unit, Phil’s vulnerability was truly on show.

And before this, just ahead of him going into the unit, his talking fast and slurred, his words erratic, his refusal to look at Jay while talking, and his choked and tearful voice, Steve delivered Phil’s desperate cry for help in an impeccable way.

I, like many others, have been there. Steve, whether through personal knowledge or extensive research, captured that bleakness perfectly.

Phil listed everything that should have killed him – alcoholism, violence, heart attacks, shootings to name but a few – and still, he had been unable to die.

With suicidal ideation, it was clear where Phil’s mind was travelling. We have seen him make financial gestures amid a fluctuating mood – some classic signs of potential danger.

Even in smaller scenes where he has refused social and family invitations but insisted repeatedly that he’s fine, I have been left close to tears.

Like actors in the UK given far, far more acclaim, he is hypnotic with every word he delivers and every physical gesture he makes.

He is not given the credit he deserves and, notoriously private and keen to just focus on his craft, I imagine this is something that he takes in his stride.

Steve isn’t in it for the fame or the popularity; he has said in the past that he deliberately doesn’t dissect his own acting in interviews as it takes the magic away.

But whatever his approach is, it works – there is a pretty much unanimous view that he is a UK national treasure.

Amid snobbery towards soaps, there are many examples of shining stars, some who remain with the shows and some who go on to other things.

But soap isn’t just a training ground for actors who then flourish elsewhere, it’s a home of some absolutely incredible performances.

Steve McFadden is the ultimate testament to that.

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.

Ask any parent who is a football fan, and they’ll tell you, seeing young players come through your club really does have parallels with those milestone moments in your children’s lives. 

As a dad, I’m fortunate enough to be able to look back on plenty of proud memories – my daughter’s first words, my son’s first steps. 

And as an Arsenal fan, I allow myself to take vicarious pride in the successes of the young players who come through our academy, light up the first team, and make their first forays onto the international stage. 

This year, no-one has given me that glowing feeling more than 18-year-old Myles Lewis-Skelly, who was called up to the England squad for the first time this week. 

But sadly, like so many young Black football players, the Arsenal star has experienced the grim racism that comes hand-in-hand with success on the pitch. 

And it’s on all of us to call it out. 

Myles has had a breakout year. Last summer he was very much still seen by many as an academy player who may make a couple of appearances for Arsenal across the coming season. 

Instead of settling for that, Myles has surpassed all expectations and become a mainstay in Mikel Arteta’s team. Anoraks like myself have known of Myles’ playing talent for years, but a bonus from his brilliant season has been discovering his personality. 

He’s confident, bold and entertaining, refreshingly intelligent and perceptive in interviews, and he even manages to showcase his character on the pitch, most notably in mimicking Erling Haaland’s celebration after scoring against Manchester City.

He’s a brilliant player and an equally impressive young man. 

But that hasn’t stopped him being a target. 

As he arrived at St George’s park this week to meet up with Thomas Tuchel’s England squad for the first time, the England X account posted a picture of Myles with his suitcase – looking, well, like an excited teenager ready to represent his country.

The tweet has had over 13million views, far more than any others posted this week, and while there are fans sharing the post with words of congratulations for Myles, there’s also a large number of posts abusing him.

There are, predictably on X these days, a few posts that are directly racist, throwing slurs or offensive comments his way or even, bizarrely, accusing him of throwing up a gang sign. 

But what caught my eye was how many fans were berating Myles for his apparent attitude.

He’s accused of being ‘cocky’, ‘arrogant’, unlikeable, even ‘disgusting’ – with others telling the teenager to ‘grow up’.  

At first I was baffled. A young man who has performed so well, surpassed expectation, who is about to help his country (not least at left back, a position that was alien to him a few weeks ago and an area where England are severely lacking in talent). 

Even after taking my Arsenal tinted glasses off, I couldn’t work it out. What’s not to like about this kid?

And then I remember another young man from Arsenal’s academy, Bukayo Saka, who, at 19, helped England reach the final of Euro 2021.

He missed a penalty in the final of the competition, as did both Jadon Sancho and Marcus Rashford.

Sancho and Saka were 21 and 19 respectively at the time, Rashford had just spent months campaigning against the government to ensure kids wouldn’t go hungry. 

All three received despicable racist abuse.

Seeing the comments levelled at Myles Lewis-Skelly, I can’t feel but compare the reaction to him to that received by Newcastle’s Dan Burn, who also joined the squad.

There’s an age difference between the two, but when the England X account tweeted a video welcoming Burn, the comments were overwhelmingly positive, with fans saying he was ‘likeable’, a ‘man of the people’ and a great character and role model. 

All adjectives I’d use to describe Lewis-Skelly, incidentally. 

It’s not a new problem, or one that can be attributed to social media. In 1982, Cyrille Regis, only the third Black player to represent England, received a bullet in the post after being selected to play for his country. 

Viv Anderson, the second Black player to do so, wrote that he and Cyrille had to laugh at the racist abuse they received, otherwise they’d have never made a living in football.

I wish that Viv and Cyrille hadn’t had to do that. I wish that Jadon and Marcus and Bukayo weren’t kicked while they were down with disgusting racism after coming so close to bringing England a first trophy in 60 years. 

And I wish that Myles Lewis-Skelly was welcomed by fans, and posted as much on X, writing that I hadn’t seen a young white player receive similar treatment to Myles. There were plenty of people disagreeing, and plenty of whataboutery. 

Some pointed to the abuse that both Wayne Rooney and David Beckham received.

Neither deserved that either, but any criticism they received was far into their international careers, often as a result of highly publicised mistakes or indiscretions in their private lives. 

Not, like Myles Lewis-Skelly, before they had even kicked a ball. 

His crimes, his apparent unlikability, seems to equate to mimicking the goal celebration of a rival player and a dodgy red card. 

So, it seems there’s another, sadder reason that he’s being tarred with the same brush as Saka, Rashford, Sancho, and too many others before him. 

Myles is exactly what I want a young England player to be, and a young Arsenal player to be.

He’s exactly the kind of role model I want my children to look up to, confident, bold, with a strong personality and a fearlessness in expressing himself. 

I’ve received thousands of messages of abuse after sticking up for Myles online – but I know the abuse directed at him is much worse.

So I’ll do it again. I’ll call out racism when I see it. 

For every young Black player that has and will represent England, I feel a responsibility to stand up for them, loudly and publicly. 

It’s the only way things will ever change.

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.

Donald Trump might believe that he knows the Art of the Deal, but Vladimir Putin knows better. 

That’s why he is laughing at the US President – but there’s nothing funny about it, because Ukraine is paying the price. 

This week, when Trump eagerly awaited a call from the Russian leader, Putin made him wait over an hour while he enjoyed an event in Moscow. This wasn’t a scheduling mix-up or a simple delay – it was a calculated display of power. 

And when the call finally happened, despite what Trump had previously claimed, Putin didn’t budge on ending the war. Quelle surprise.

Putin had, according to a US readout, told Trump he would stop attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure. But there is no sign he was telling the truth. 

And why would he? Putin is not here to negotiate. He’s not interested in peace. He’s here to win. And winning means flattening Ukraine until they concede to his unreasonable demands, ceding land and authority. 

Trump, after the call, praised Putin as ‘very solid, very strong.’

He has since spoken to Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but neglected to give details on a peace deal, claiming in an uncharacteristically muted statement that ‘we are very much on track’. 

This was not the statement Trump expected to make. 

For him, this was supposed to be a triumphant moment. He spent last year’s campaign trail claiming he’d end the war in 24 hours if only we gave him the chance.

Like all of Trump’s grand promises, it was questionable whether it was true, and he now even claims he was being ‘a little bit sarcastic’ when he made that pledge. 

Far from getting the President of Russia to agree to a peace deal, he couldn’t even get Putin to pick up the phone on time. 

Worse still, Russia’s refusal to engage in meaningful ceasefire talks exposes the lie at the heart of Trump’s ‘peace plan.’ 

Russia doesn’t want one. 

Putin’s delay is a calculated humiliation, a public display of the power imbalance. In the world of fragile male ego politics, punctuality is a signal of dominance. 

Trump tries to act like he’s a master negotiator, but Putin treats him like a hapless contestant on a Russian version of The Apprentice. He’s not testing Trump’s resolve – he’s denying its existence and toying with the supposed ‘most powerful man in the world’. 

Putin’s rejection of a ceasefire isn’t about strategy – it’s about survival. Keeping the war going fuels American right-wing anger towards Ukraine, weakens Western unity, and isolates the US from its allies.

The longer this drags out, the better it is for Russia.

Even more telling is what Putin is demanding as a condition for any truce: a complete halt to all weapons deliveries and military aid to Ukraine. 

European leaders see this for what it is – a trap. If Ukraine is left defenceless while Russia rearms, any ceasefire would be a countdown to another invasion.

For all the bluster and grandstanding, this basic fact remains: Ukraine has agreed to a ceasefire. Russia has not. And no amount of Trump boasting about ‘solid’ phone calls will change that. 

Fewer than 60 days in and Trump’s second term is an unconditional failure.

Domestically, the economy is in freefall, food prices are skyrocketing beyond recognition, and unemployment is going up amid fears of a recession. 

Internationally, his ‘epic’ Israel-Gaza ceasefire has collapsed, his slashing of aid has already resulted in suspected deaths and he has made no progress on Ukraine.

Instead, Trump has strengthened Russia and punished Zelenskyy at every turn.

Seeking financial compensation for US aid, Trump turned to the victim, not the aggressor. 

Seeking diplomatic advice, he called on the Kremlin, rather than European allies. 

Seeking the terms of a peace deal, he met with Putin, not Zelenskyy.

Meanwhile, this morning, Russian state-controlled media is claiming Putin got the better of Trump, humiliated Europe and ‘detoxified’ his country’s image.

And yet, none of this means anything to the women and children suffering under the bombing organised by Putin last night – on the very day he claimed he was committed to peace.

The UK and our European allies know what’s at stake. As we scramble to fix Trump’s mess, Putin is watching it all, calculating his next moves. 

As he does, one thing is clear: he’s not negotiating with Trump – he’s laughing at him. 

As tempting as it is to revel in the President’s misfortune, it’s not Trump paying the ultimate price. 

It’s Ukraine’s brave soldiers. And her innocent civilians. 

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.

In November 2026, Wade Robson and James Safechuck are finally due to get their day in court more than 10 years after first coming forward to accuse Michael Jackson of sexually abusing them as children.

It’s been an uphill battle to bring their joint suit against MJJ Productions and MJJ Venture (owned by the Jackson estate) to face a jury, accusing the company of failing to protect them from Jackson, even making sure the singer could get them on their own.

For any victim of sexual assault, coming forward is an act of bravery few can ever understand unless they’ve been through it themselves.

For Robson and Safechuck though, they knew full well they would be opening themselves up to levels of abuse typically reserved for serial killers when they spoke in graphic detail about their respective experiences with biggest-selling artist of all time in the two-part documentary, Leaving Neverland.

Because the sad truth is, Michael Jackson’s fans will never believe he is responsible for these crimes, even if they had all the ‘proof’ in the world. 

In 2019’s Leaving Neverland, Safechuck described their relationship as being like a ‘married couple’, recalling Jackson hosting a fake wedding ceremony and even producing an engagement ring. He was around 11 years old at the time.

‘He was one of the kindest, most loving, caring people I knew. And he also sexually abused me,’ said Robson.

Robson claims he gave oral sex to Jackson when he was just seven years old after first meeting two years before at a dance competition.

Robson’s family claim they were convinced by Jackson to leave Robson alone in his care, which is when he says the abuse began.

Despite Leaving Neverland’s critical acclaim, Jackson fans took to the streets in protest, with the singer’s family calling it a one-sided ‘tabloid character assassination’, despite turning down repeated attempts to give their side.

The dilemma with most sexual assault cases, particularly ones as historic as this dating back to 1988, is that the evidence is very much one person’s account’s versus another.

Six years after the release of Leaving Neverland, a sequel is about to air on Channel 4 and YouTube, revisiting Robson and Safechuck, who have continued to fight the Jackson estate for justice, capturing the ‘ongoing legal battle, the resulting personal toll and the backlash they faced from Jackson’s global fan base’.

It largely explores the tactics used by MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures to prevent their case from going to trial.

The Leaving Neverland sequel doesn’t necessarily move the story along; there are no new survivors coming forward with similar accusations and Robson and Safechuck pretty much said it all five years ago.

But Leaving Neverland 2 does explore the reluctance of Jackson fans to engage with the documentary at all.

The reception to Leaving Neverland was as polarising as it gets.

One side condemned Jackson as a monster, vowing never to listen to his music again.

Oprah Winfrey invited Robson and Safechuck to her show. Like Robson and Safechuck, Winfrey recalled her own ‘lightbulb moment’ when she was 42 that she had been abused. 

The other side, however, became even more fired up to fight his corner and Jackson’s music soared in sales.

The release of Leaving Neverland confirmed both Robson and Safechuck’s biggest fear.

‘Michael said your life would be over if people knew,’ says Safechuck.

He was right – the wrath of millions upon millions of Jackson fans clearly isn’t worth all the money in the world, yet both men continue to fight.

At one point in Leaving Neverland 2, Andy Signore, host of Popcorned Planet, is determined to disprove the men. He questions why they waited so long and why more children haven’t come forward when so many stayed at Jackson’s Neverland mansion, as if anyone’s suggested all children under Jackson’s watch were abused.

Neither of those reasons even remotely discredit Robson or Safechuck, but actually the timing of their coming forward falls pretty consistently with many adults who later realise they were abused as children years and years later.

Watching Leaving Neverland, it’s hard not to be convinced by their case, which could be in part why so many of Jackson’s supporters refuse to watch it.

It’s not just inconceivable to Jackson fans, it’s impossible. Their idol isn’t just one of the most important musicians of all time, he is a god-like figure of an unhealthy degree bound to warp the judgment of anyone who feels changed by his music.

The world quite literally wouldn’t be the same without Jackson – that’s indisputable. His impact on music, pop culture, and Black history is unprecedented but it shouldn’t make him immune to being held accountable for some of the most disturbing accusations imaginable.

But whatever the outcome of the trial in November 2026, will Jackson’s legacy change? I don’t even see how it will even be remotely impacted.

Right now, if you walk through London’s Old Compton Street, you’ll find an enormous queue that goes around the block of fans heading inside to watch the carefully santisied MJ: The Musical, with complete disregard of allegations levelled at a man accused of paedophilia.

His estate is still worth over $2billion and counting, his music still sells in bucket loads and a biopic starring his nephew as the King of Pop is expected to be one of the biggest box office success stories of 2025.

I personally struggle to separate the art from the artist. I find it deeply uncomfortable listening to R Kelly singing sexualised lyrics knowing he preyed on young and vulnerable women and I don’t want to listen to Kanye West rapping about Jesus knowing he calls himself a ‘proud antisemite’.

Likewise, after hearing grown men accusing Michael Jackson of giving them oral sex while they slept makes me less enthusiastic about dancing to Billie Jean.

Granted, with Jackson, under the court of law he’s yet to be found guilty. He was arrested on child molestation charges in 2003 but later acquitted in 2005 and his estate continues to deny all allegations of child abuse since his death in 2009. 

But before he died, he did pay millions to prevent a case from going to trial and his behaviour with children that played out in front of our very eyes is at the very least enough for me to find him a deeply unsettling figure.

There is as much evidence to support Robson and Safechuck as there is to dismiss them.

I can respect that others may have their doubts, but to flat out refuse to engage with their statements or rule them out before actually watching Leaving Neverland speaks more about idolising Michael Jackson than it does the integrity of Robson and Safechuck’s allegations.

We know Jackson’s well-documented history of hosting sleepovers with children, refusing to allow their parents access to these said sleepovers, and that he settled a lawsuit with Jordan Chandler in 1994 for a reported $23million.

Leaving Neverland 2 won’t do anything to sway opinion, and actually, unlike the first, it’s not even trying to.

No doubt the case will be revisited for Leaving Neverland 3 once Robson and Safechuck’s trial against MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures has taken place.

‘Whatever’s the final outcome, I don’t see how I lose,’ Robson says. ‘If I get the opportunity to get back in there and get on the stand, and tell the truth like I wasn’t able to for decades, that’s a win.’

What will come out in that trial we’ll wait and see but while a judge may rule in Robson and Safechuck’s favour, I can’t see any way they’ll be able to convince the jury of public opinion when Jackson’s fan base isn’t even willing to even listen.

Leaving Neverland airs March 18 on Channel 4.

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 couldn’t help but roll my eyes when The White Lotus’s Jason Isaacs claimed ‘no one would dream’ of discussing a woman’s private parts. 

Where has he been?

Every season, without fail, Mike White’s hit HBO series The White Lotus sparks fervent discourse for its shocking, scandalous and outrageously explicit themes. 

This season alone there’s an entire incest subplot, commentary on Trump’s America and plenty of love for Aimee Lou Wood’s untampered-with teeth. 

One moment, however, that left fans’ jaws hanging wide-open was when Jason’s character Tim Ratliff – dysfunctional dad and dubious businessman – went full-frontal nude in front of his mortified children.

Following in the footsteps of Theo James’ own newsworthy flash in season two, the moment sparked plenty of questions including whether it was Jason’s real penis.

Especially since his predecessor, Theo, had previously shared that he had used a prosthetic.

Discussing the speculation on CBS Mornings, the Harry Potter star seemed disgruntled.

He said: ‘A lot of people are debating it. It’s all over the internet. And it’s interesting because the best actress this year is Mikey Madison at the Oscars. And I don’t see anybody discussing her vulva, which was on [the screen] all the time… It’s interesting that there’s a double standard for men. 

‘But when women are naked, Margaret Qualley as well, in The Substance, nobody would dream of talking to her about her genitalia or her nipples or any of those things. So, it’s odd that there’s a double standard.’

And while Jason is more than entitled to shut down questions around his private parts if he doesn’t feel comfortable – his understanding of women’s plight in Hollywood couldn’t be more wrong. 

And it’s an especially concerning take from a veteran star who has not only been knee-deep in this culture for many decades but has had plenty of female co-stars who have likely undergone the scrutiny he claims isn’t taking place. 

It feels almost futile to list all the ways in which women’s bodies have been under the spotlight over the decades – from the 90s and 00s when Pamela Anderson’s sex tapes, eating disorders and the male gaze was the order of the day.

To the modern day where, despite movements like #MeToo and attempts to make Hollywood more inclusive, social media and popular discourse remains an exhausting place for women and their bodies – whether nude or fully-clothed.

Brooke Shields has opened up about how being sexualised from as early as her childhood shaped her life in her documentary Pretty Baby: Brooke Shields.

In 2007, barely an adult, Vanessa Hudgens was the subject of depraved internet gossip and intrigue after her nudes were leaked. 

In 2013, Blue Is The Warmest Colour stars Léa Seydoux and Adèle Exarchopoulos were interrogated by the world about the lesbian sex scenes in the movie – and at one point admitted filming it was humiliating sometimes’ as they were made to feel like ‘prostitutes’.

In 2016, the President of the United States Donald Trump publicly said that chat about forcibly kissing and groping women was simply ‘locker room talk’.

People lay in wait of Millie Bobby Brown turning 18 in 2022 to flood her social media with sexually explicit images.

Last year, Euphoria star Sydney Sweeney’s boobs somehow became a political symbol representing the ‘death of wokeness’. 

The same year, Megan Fox told the Call Me Daddy podcast how being labelled a ‘sex symbol’ in her youth fuelled her body dysmorphia.

During Trump’s inauguration, Kid Rock felt empowered enough to tell a female reporter she ‘sounds sexy’ on live TV.

And we see how the audience’s perception of a woman’s body remains a central theme of plenty of TV shows and films. 

For example, the Bond girl (already defined by a man) has been, up until very recently, almost exclusively associated with her sexual appeal.

There’s plenty of commentary yet on a woman’s body and how it is treated on screen – for better or for worse.

HBO’s The Idol was harshly criticised for its depiction of lead character Jocelyn, with the heavy sexualisation of her body told through the perspective of the male characters. British GQ even labelled some scenes ‘trauma porn’.

In 2019, rights group Plan International and the Geena Davis Institute, found that female leads were four times more likely to be shown naked on screen than similar male roles.

‘The bigger picture is that gender discrimination and harmful stereotypes still dominate on screen… We need to stop the sexualisation and the objectification of women and girls on screen and everywhere else,’ one of the lead researchers said at the time.

And Jason was factually wrong. 

Both the best actor winner Mikey and supporting actress nominee Margaret were asked about nudity and the use of prosthetics in their movies – given the female body is at the crux of both of these films. 

As put by America Ferrara in Barbie, women can put no foot right. 

Simone Biles is ‘too masculine’, Millie Bobby Brown looks ‘too old’ now, Sydney Sweeney has ‘big boobs’, Sabrina Carpenter is ‘too sexual’…

The amount women’s bodies – both in a fictional and real-life context – have been dissected could fill pages and pages.

There’s no end to the discourse around the female body, what it should and shouldn’t look like. It is so interwoven into Hollywood culture, it’s difficult to imagine the landscape without it. 

And unless actors like Jason fully comprehend this, they become part of the problem.

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.

Dear Alison, 

I am getting married in a month and despite choosing to go abroad to try and guarantee sunny weather, rain is forecast! 

The whole event is supposed to be outdoors: we are saying our vows on the beach then having our reception at an open-air venue.  

My fiancée and I were fine risking a bit of drizzle as it should still be warm, but the forecast is now saying there could be ‘unseasonal heavy downpours’. Our venue does have a smaller, indoor area but it’s not that nice aesthetically – and as it stands, we don’t have anywhere else to actually say ‘I do’.  

As we are still a while out, should I just hope the weather forecast changes? Should our wedding party just tough it out? Or should I rearrange everything?  

It would mean changing our venue, transport and even maybe my dress. I feel a bit sick thinking about it. 

Please help! 

Naraya

Dear Naraya, 

It must be so exciting for you that your wedding is fast approaching. 

You are still a month away, so the weather forecast could change a lot before then. 

Weather predictions, especially this far in advance, aren’t always reliable. That said, it’s wise to have a Plan B in place so you’re not left panicking if the forecast is accurate. 

You must talk to your venue as soon as possible. Ask them about their contingency plan for rain. I am sure they will have an alternative in place.   

If their indoor space is not appealing, could it be spruced up with decorations, candles, or lighting? Sometimes, creativity can make a big difference. You could speak to the venue about whether they have any props in a store room that can be used – many do.

If not, you could consider asking whether you could deliver some bits and bobs to the venue, to make it feel a bit more ‘you’.

I appreciate your venue is abroad, which limits the options you have to visit it, but the owners will be more than willing to help make sure your day is perfect. And if money is no object, you could perhaps rope in a local wedding planner who can make sure everything goes smoothly?  

If you are unable to visit before the wedding, you can arrange a Zoom call so they can show you backup options.

If the venue does not have a tent or marquee, consider hiring one if the space allows it. Renting a high-quality tent could be an ideal compromise between keeping the outdoor vibe and staying dry. 

Another option is to find an alternative venue for the ceremony. It might be worth checking nearby locations to see what is available.  

A hotel with stunning views, a picturesque church, or even a beautiful indoor hall could be a lovely and dry backup plan. 

Although, of course, many of these alternatives would come at an extra cost. 

If you decide to embrace the elements, make it part of the experience, and be well prepared. Stylish umbrellas, cosy blankets, or even fun wellies for the bridal party could turn the event into a charming, memorable one.   

Remember to remind all guests that the wedding will be outside and ask them to dress accordingly, especially if the unseasonal heavy rain does appear. 

Some of the most stunning wedding photos feature stormy skies, romantic raindrops, and glowing lights reflecting on wet surfaces. Rain on your wedding day is even considered good luck in many cultures! 

I completely understand your concerns. My husband and I have our own wedding venue and use the outdoor space as much as possible, which can certainly feel like a challenge in Scotland!  

We always have a Plan B in place and usually work it out on the day as the weather is unpredictable.

Rain is always an issue throughout each wedding season; even the summer months are not excluded. Our backup plan depends on the forecast and the size of the wedding.

A smaller wedding could still be held outside and sheltered under the trees. For larger weddings, we are lucky to have a function room with floor-to-ceiling glass doors; even when it rains, we open them. The guests are protected from the rain, but it still gives the feel of an outdoor wedding.

We also have a stretch tent we have used before, even in late Autumn, to provide that outdoor vibe and protect the guests from the elements.

Your venue will be able to guide you on the different contingencies they can offer. You certainly won’t be the first couple to have experienced an unexpected downpour. 

Having a backup that you feel happy with will take away stress and let you truly enjoy your day, rain or shine. 

Remember that the day is about you, your fiancée, and your love. No amount of rain can dampen that!    

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.

‘Is it OK if I follow up with a phone call to see how you’re enjoying our service?’

In most scenarios, this is a pretty standard question to be asked by the person setting up your internet.

But then, the operator – let’s call him Max – follows up with three words that change everything.

‘Perhaps, after hours?’

Max and I have spent the better part of an hour shamelessly flirting with each other while organising my new broadband.

He has the gift of the gab, that’s for sure – but there is also something intriguing about his voice.

It is sultry and deep, sending a shiver down my spine – and the banter was in full swing within minutes.

Max tried to stick to his sales pitch but it was no use – we were both distracted by our connection, which could be felt even through the phone.

Since he was the one working, though, I let him take the lead.

I knew the conversation was being recorded and I didn’t want to get him in trouble, so we kept our conversation appropriate – but only just.

Every word – like how my ‘needs’ could be met by this internet – was dripping with innuendo.

I casually dropped into conversation that I was single, then he did the same.

Max did his job – I signed up to the new broadband contract – but once this was done, he got down to the real business at hand.

‘I’d be more than happy to hear from you again,’ I replied and hung up the phone.

A week later, after texting each other back and forth, as well as sharing photos to show what the other person looked like, I was on a night out with mates when he asked if I wanted to come meet him for a drink at his local.

Max was just as sexy in person as his voice suggested but it became evident very quickly that our attraction was purely physical.

To cut a long story short: We didn’t fall in love, but we did have sex – on a picnic table, of all places.

He lived with his parents and I couldn’t be bothered to bring him back to mine – so we just popped into the park next door.

It was cold, quick and dirty. We didn’t meet up again. But even as I stood at the bus stop at midnight, waiting for my ride home, I had no regrets.

This happened a long time ago but I still laugh about it with my mates to this day.

I’ve never been one to look a gift horse in the mouth so when the universe delivers opportunity my way, I tend to say yes – regardless if it’s romance or just the potential of a good shag.

But the thing about adventure is that you need to be open to it.

If recent statistics are anything to go by, a lot of Brits are suffering from ‘dating burnout’ – often linked to the rise in online dating and apps – which also affects our sex lives.

These days, most of us meet someone in one of three ways: online, at work or through friends.

So it makes complete sense if you’re finding it difficult to make spontaneous connections.

But if you allow yourself to step out of your comfort zone, fate will work its magic in the strangest of ways – and not just when you’re setting up your new broadband.

A few years back, I was on a date with someone I’d met on Tinder.

Jerry* and I went for drinks and he was a nice enough guy but honestly, I was bored.

The chat felt dry and a bit forced.

I was disappointed but not surprised – this was just one in a string of bad dates.

Hoping that things would turn around, I decided to persevere and went to order another drink for us at the bar while Jerry waited at our table.

Funnily enough, the pub we were in was hosting a speed dating event on the other side of the room.

Sitting at table three was a very handsome man who stood out from the bunch with his charming ginger beard.

Suddenly, we locked eyes.

He smiled, I did too – but neither of us was in a position to talk to the other at this point in time.

Lowering my voice, I asked the bartender for a pen and paper, scribbled down my number and asked if she could discreetly deliver the note to the hot stranger later that evening.

I also told her that I was currently on a date with someone else.

‘I’ve got your back,’ she replied.

Admittedly, it’s not very polite to give out your number while you’re on a date.

I was very careful so that Jerry wouldn’t notice and get hurt, but sometimes you have to roll with the punches.

The next night, I was sitting in a different pub with – you guessed it – the ginger stranger.

While he didn’t end up being ‘The One’, the experience of how we’d met was exhilarating.

He was a pretty great kisser, too.

Then there was the time I ended up sharing a taxi with a gorgeous Aussie after a night out at a casino; I’d hopped in a cab just outside, and he asked if we could split it.

His name was Bryan, he was a 25-year-old personal trainer and he thought I was sexy.

Twenty minutes later, when the taxi stopped outside his house, he asked if I’d like to join him for a nightcap (read: hot sex).

I said yes.

(Side note: I shared his address with a friend to stay safe).

Another time I had a month-long fling with a stranger who I used to run into on the Tube platform every day on my way to work.

We threw curious glances and smiles at each other each time but it took months until he – thankfully – worked up the courage to say hi.

He was a lovely guy but we ended up not being very well-suited.

My point is this, though: Spontaneous, mysterious and fantastic connections can still be found. You just have to be brave enough to look for them.

Taking a break from dating apps and going ‘offline’ to meet people might lessen any fatigue you’re feeling.

To be clear, I’m not saying that you should call up your local broadband provider for a quick shag or ride-share taxis everywhere. Those are just my experiences.

Start by simply looking up.

Sit in a social space of your choosing – a pub, museum, the local Starbucks – and if you see someone you find attractive, throw them a smile.

Pay attention to their body language and if they don’t seem interested, don’t push it.

But if they smile back, say hello. Who knows what might happen?

*Name has been changed

This article was originally published January 24, 2025

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.

This weekend marks the return of Formula One for its 75th Season and big changes are afoot…

Lewis Hamilton’s in red, Daniel Riccardo has gone and, for the first time ever, women are making up 41% of viewers, with the fastest growing demographic being those aged 16-24.  

This unprecedented surge in popularity amongst women is thanks, in no small part, to the huge popularity of Netflix’s show Drive to Survive; effectively Keeping Up With The Kardashians but for one of the most exciting sports in history.

The show, which follows the Formula One season, returned for the seventh year last weekend, and if previous stats are anything to go by, it’s likely to amass more than 100 million viewers. 

And while there are grumblings among life-long F1 supporters that the series has attracted a cohort of fair weather fans – mostly girls accused of being more interested in drivers’ outfits than the engineering of the cars they’re racing – the effect the show has had on the sport is undeniable, and exciting.

But I suppose I would say that, because I am one of the aforementioned girlies.

Despite having grown up with the sounds of the F1 every other weekend of my childhood, it was my brother that ended up with a signed Alonso T-shirt framed on his bedroom wall and not me.

Whether I lacked the interest inherently or was excluded from the environment quite consciously, I don’t know. But either way, the F1 is something that I only truly invested in after the first season of Drive to Survive aired.

Relatively late to the game, I soon found myself invested in Hamilton’s wardrobe, familiarising myself with the star signs of most of the drivers, and my interest has only intensified year on year.

The show has made the sport more accessible to women in a way that it wasn’t really before – thanks, no doubt, to the sensational production of the show, which others are now tripping over themselves to replicate.  

Where many men grew up with their father’s teaching them the ins and outs of the sport, for many women, like me, that fell to Drive To Survive’s resident journalist, Will Buxton.

His habit of pointing out the obvious, along with the shows endeavours to familiarise fans with the men beneath the helmets has made it so that 300 million women now follow F1 willingly.

For marketers and advertisers, this now makes the decision to get into Formula One sponsorship an incredibly lucrative business opportunity. 

Forecasts suggest that women will control 75% of discretionary spending globally by 2029, and that more than half of female fans are likely to buy from companies that sponsor women’s sport, compared with just 0.1% of male fans. 

In short, it’s a marketing masterpiece and one that brands are starting to tap into in a very real way.

Charlotte Tilbury made history in 2024 by becoming the first female-founded company to partner with the fast-growing F1 academy – headed up by Suzi Wolfe – and wrap a Formula 4 car in its iconic branding with the slogan ‘makeup your destiny’.

In that same month, partnerships like the one between Abercrombie & Fitch and McClaren were announced and saw women everywhere wearing the racing brand’s signature colour, papaya. 

This year, skincare brand Elemis are sponsoring Aston Martin. This collaboration, and ones like it, reflect a broader trend of increased female engagement in motorsport, and actually, sports in general.

We saw it after the Lionesses won the Euros in 2022; in the fact that there was a 56% increase in women’s and girls’ participation in football overall, with a 140% increase in participation among girls under 16. And we’re seeing it again now with F1.

So it’s exciting that shows like Drive to Survive are making sports more accessible, and it’s vital that brands get behind it.

There’s just one barrier that we still have to overcome, and it’s the most formidable one by far: the average male fan.  

This is the guy that sees a woman in the pub watching a football game and insists she explains the offside rule to him.

The one that needs you to tell him how many points are in a conversion, the starting line for the Chelsea vs Villa game last month, and who won the Euros in 1992 before he’ll consider you a legitimate fan (it was Denmark, in case you were wondering).

He’s the one that is annoyed with Drive to Survive – and not because of its occasional over-dramatisation or misrepresentation of the sport – and finds me and my ilk a constant point of contention.

I could speculate for hours about his motives; perhaps he’s protective of the community that he feels at home in, or maybe his lifelong interest in the sport has given him a sense of entitlement he doesn’t think anyone coming in any later deserves.

He could also be worried that as more traditionally ‘feminine’ things like makeup and fashion encroach on a historically male environment, it will be ruined.

Of course, in reality, an interest in cars is no more important or impressive than an interest in fashion, and appreciating a driver’s outfit doesn’t mean you can’t also care about how they drive, but good luck telling him that.

Had Drive To Survive brought in an influx of new male followers, I’m not sure there’d be the same disparity. But what I do know is that the gatekeeping of the fandom was a very big part of the reason I became as apathetic as I did in the first place.

It’s indicative of a wider exclusionary attitude we have towards women in both sports and sporting environments and we have to change that.

So, with every big move being made by brands in these areas right now, I feel a rush of excitement. 

Finally, the extraordinary value of the fangirl is being recognised for what it is: one of the most powerful commodities of a capitalist society; worthy, at the very least, of a seat in the stands.  

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.

Dancing on Ice has been axed after 19 years and finally, Holly Willoughby could be about to enter her best era yet.

For the last 16 years, Holly has been ITV’s darling, becoming one-half of the most popular double act since Ant and Dec alongside the now disgraced Phillip Schofield on This Morning.

Their visibly tight bond was unmissable television. Beneath clips of them curling up into fits of laughter, there would be endless comments from fans tagging their friends, writing ‘this is us’.

In turn, Holly quite rightly became TV’s ‘golden girl’, she couldn’t put a single foot wrong.

We got to see her naughty side on Keith Lemon’s debaucherous Celebrity Juice (where she was a captain for 22 series) but she held her own in tough interviews (unless they were with then Prime Minister Boris Johnson) and was pitch-perfect as the best friend a closeted gay man needed when Schofield came out on national television.

But two years ago, the gleam of Holly Willoughby began to fade – albeit due to circumstances out of her control.

Signs that her friendship with Schofield was waning became glaringly obvious on This Morning.

In his abysmal TV comeback on Channel 5’s Cast Away, Schofield claimed he was sacked from the show because his brother was jailed for child sex abuse and not because of his affair with a much younger ITV colleague.

For Holly though, navigating her ‘TV husband’ being at the centre of such a colossal scandal was always going to be her Everest.

The public lost trust in This Morning and, through no fault of her own, they’d also lost trust in her.

Then, just weeks later, police confirmed a security guard from Essex, Gavin Plumb, plotted to abduct, rape and kidnap Holly.

Naturally, she stepped down with immediate effect soon after and cut herself off from the public glare.

With both her life and career in danger, 2023 was the year from hell for Holly.

Already, 2025 is looking so much brighter. Holly’s biggest solo job to date, Celebrity Bear Hunt, was a resounding triumph when it launched on Netflix this year, shooting straight to the top of the streamer’s chart just hours after its release.

Critics and fans loved it. The last thing anyone thought we needed was another jungle show but watching celebs including Mel B, Boris Becker and Laurence Lleweylyn Bowen genuinely risk their lives to be chased around by Bear Grylls was surprisingly fun and will be back for another series – a rare feat under the notoriously ruthless Netflix that loves swinging its axe on series before they’ve been given a chance to grow.

Many thought Holly wouldn’t recover from her This Morning exit, but a number one show on Netflix in 2025 is beyond anything she could achieve on ITV.

On Sunday, it was confirmed she’s quit a reboot of the game show You Bet! alongside Stephen Mulhern after one series and Dancing on Ice is said to be on the chopping block – which could be exactly the news she needs.

Since splitting from Schofe, Holly seems lost on ITV.

Dancing on Ice was always insignificant compared to its nearest rival, Strictly, and there’s something quite sad about watching her present tired game show reboots no one asked for.

Netflix, however, saw her worth and gave her the perfect new direction. Celebrity Bear Hunt was high-stakes, the celebrities were often in peril and Holly got to swoop in as their maternal guardian angel and finally take charge of a big-budget blockbuster reality TV series without a male co-host.

According to The Sun, her rebrand is only just beginning. While the best ITV could offer her was You Bet! the BBC is reportedly lining her up for a long overdue reboot of Blind Date – and she is the perfect match.

She’s warm, much funnier than she’s given credit for and I would happily let her set me up on a blind date if I didn’t already have a boyfriend to cook and clean up after.

For millennials like me and Holly, Blind Date was by far Cilla’s most memorable show. It came when primetime Saturday night was at its best, with Baywatch followed by Gladiators followed by Cilla and our Graham.

It was trash TV but with a weirdly classy touch and the first time I saw real love actually unfold before my eyes.

Holly is a romantic, she has an empathy few other presenters manage to convey with genuine sincerity and will make Blind Date her own for generations who are just experiencing Gladiators for the first time with the BBC’s massively successful reboot.

After his car-crash TV comeback, Schofield’s career seems to now be limited to being pictured taking the bins out, but Holly’s dignified response to his cutting remarks has been to bounce back with silence and huge success on her own two feet.

But ITV simply hasn’t had the space or scope to make the most of Holly. Its Saturday night schedule is booked up with Ant and Dec and hasn’t had a successful new entertainment show since The Masked Singer, which is now in its fifth year.

Just two years after many wrote Holly off, she’s conquered streaming and with Saturday night television on its knees, she could be the one to save it on the BBC.

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.

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 went out for dinner with a friend a month or so ago, and we were talking about our relationships. I mentioned that I was desperate for my partner to propose and joked that I had ‘about another 12 months of waiting in me’. 

My friend, clearly not realising I was being playful, panicked – and confessed that I could expect a proposal very soon, implying that she knew it was 100% on the cards. 

While I was happy to hear it, I immediately ran through all the dates my boyfriend and I had coming up in the diary and realised he was probably going to propose on a holiday we were taking to see my family a week later. 

Well, it turns out I was correct. While I’m over the moon that I’m going to be marrying my soulmate, I’m a bit pissed off at my friend for spoiling the surprise. My partner had done such a good job of concealing his intentions, I honestly would have been none the wiser. 

My fiancé would also hate to know I’d been told and that his friend – this girl’s boyfriend – betrayed his confidence. 

How do I get over my feelings of annoyance? Should I tell my fiancé? And should I confront my friend? 

Thanks, 

Lisa

Dear Lisa, 

Congratulations. You are engaged to your soulmate, and that’s the most crucial point to remember. 

Ultimately, what truly matters is the depth of your relationship and the significance of the proposal, not the surprise element; your love and commitment are what make this engagement special. 

All of that said, I do also completely understand why you’re feeling a little deflated. You had imagined – and wanted – a wholly unexpected, out-of-the-blue proposal that would sweep you off your feet; instead, you were able to put two and two together ahead of time. 

It’s totally normal that you’re feeling a bit let down. 

Your emotions are valid, and it’s important to acknowledge and accept them. 

However: I gather from what you’ve told me that your friend didn’t actually spill the details of when, where, or how your fiancé planned to propose. All she did was try to reassure you that it was going to happen at some point. She was probably trying to be supportive rather than secretive. 

And her words didn’t give it away – it was your detective work that meant you realised when the proposal was going to take place. 

Once the idea was planted, you started analysing the upcoming dates and figured it out. 

Your friend likely had no idea you’d do this. After all, engagements can happen at any time, and you do not have to go away to be engaged. You just happened to guess when it might happen, and you just happened to be right. 

It is easy to feel like something was taken from you, but the surprise wasn’t stolen – it just played out differently than you expected. 

Blaming your friend will not change what happened; and it might make her feel bad about something she didn’t actually do. 

Remember, you control how you perceive and react to this situation. 

Regarding telling your fiancé, what would it achieve; especially if he were someone who would be upset knowing you had a suspicion beforehand? 

After all, he pulled off a beautiful proposal, and you still said yes with excitement – so why dampen that moment? 

Plus: your friend didn’t betray your fiancé’s confidence. No one is at fault here. 

Remember, you still get to experience the love and intention behind the proposal. Your fiancé put in the effort to make it unique, and that’s something to cherish. 

Your future is bright and full of love, and this proposal is just the beginning

Most importantly, you still get to marry the love of your life. That is what you need to celebrate. 

Life is not perfect, and you cannot control how events happen. Love isn’t about orchestrating the ideal surprises – it’s about the thought, effort, and commitment behind them. It is important to remember that. 

Your fiancé planned this proposal because he loves you and wants to spend his life with you. That’s the true magic of it, not the element of surprise. 

So enjoy your engagement, celebrate with your fiancé, and don’t waste another second feeling frustrated with people who haven’t done anything wrong. 

The love, the commitment, the excitement – all of that is what really matters. 

Your future is bright and full of love, and this proposal is just the beginning of a beautiful adventure. 

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.

Here’s something my friends and family have never heard before: I’m completely lost for words. 

It’s taken me unusually long to gather my thoughts for this column because I just couldn’t find what to say.

My opinion of Donald Trump isn’t exactly a secret, my disdain for his dangerous approach to Ukraine is well-documented, but even I didn’t see his most recent move coming.

Trump says he wants peace, but at every turn, he is punishing Ukraine, not Russia. He said he was tired of watching Ukrainian people die. 

So why is he apparently preparing to deport 240,000 of them straight back into the jaws of a deadly war zone? 

Reports at home and abroad suggest that the President is going to revoke the protections they’ve enjoyed in the US since fleeing the conflict. 

Let that sink in for a moment. These 240,000 humans are not abstract statistics – that’s a quarter of a million mothers, fathers, and children who escaped Putin’s missiles and brutality.

There are no words to describe the wave of despair I felt upon hearing this news. My initial reaction isn’t printable. But as I paced my room, a mixture of frustration and emotion simmering, my phone lit up as friends texted me in complete disbelief. 

The conclusion was unanimous. Evil. Not just pure evil, but evil on a historic and unprecedented scale.

There will be deaths and the blood of those families will be on Trump’s hands as much as they are on Putin’s.

Families like Yulia’s, whose story I recently read about. 

They fled Ukraine through unimaginable hardship days trapped in terrifying uncertainty, enduring relentless missile attacks, panic attacks, and severe deprivation. 

Upon finally reaching safety in Arlington, Virginia, Yulia and her family began rebuilding their lives: finding jobs, enrolling their children in schools, and becoming valued members of their new community. 

Now, they’re faced with the devastating threat of being uprooted once again, returned to the horrors they narrowly escaped amid Trump’s reported plans to deport the Ukrainians who now call America their home. 

This is a tale of two conflicts: the war in Ukraine and the battle for America’s soul—and Trump’s latest betrayal reveals exactly how America is faring in its internal struggle.

Joe Biden’s administration helped Ukrainian immigrants resettle in the United States under the Uniting for Ukraine program, allowing them to legally work and live safely in America. 

Trump’s decision to revoke this protection and throw these families back into Putin’s war machine isn’t strength, ‘America First’ or even a vain attempt to secure peace – it’s moral bankruptcy at its absolute worst. 

America is a nation of immigrants. Its foundation and meteoric rise as a country is thanks to immigrants, and its true strength has always been grounded in compassion and moral clarity. 

Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike have historically united around principles of honour, freedom, and protecting the vulnerable.

There are countless examples through the centuries. When the Great Famine devastated Ireland, over a million Irish immigrants found refuge in America. 

When Europe faced the horrors of Nazi Germany, America welcomed nearly 200,000 Jews fleeing persecution. 

In the aftermath of the Vietnam War, America sheltered thousands of Vietnamese families fleeing communist aggression. 

These decisions set a global moral example, a testament to America’s strength, compassion and leadership.

Today, however, Trump is choosing cruelty over compassion. He is squeezing what little soul the country has left under the guise that it’s about being ‘fair’ to America.

But Trump doesn’t understand the meaning of the word ‘fair.’ His vision is blurred by his obvious admiration for Vladmir Putin. 

If Trump wants ‘fair’ compensation for the cost of supporting Ukraine, why is he demanding it from the invaded, not the invader? 

Right now, there’s over $300 billion of frozen Russian assets sitting idle in Europe. Why isn’t Trump sanctioning Russia aggressively himself, seizing their assets, and repaying American taxpayers directly? 

It’s quicker, more effective, and infinitely fairer than stripping rare minerals from Ukraine or plotting to topple Ukrainian leadership through duplicitous back-channel schemes or public Oval Office dressing downs?

This is precisely what the UK is doing—because that approach is fair. Last week, Keir Starmer announced plans to use frozen Russian assets to fund increased support for Ukraine. 

America could do the same, but Trump isn’t interested in genuine fairness or peace. 

He’s committed to punishing the victim, not the aggressor.

Trump’s potential deportation of refugees isn’t just abandoning Ukraine; it’s abandoning America’s own moral compass. 

If America allows compassion and core values to be replaced by cruelty and cynicism, it loses something far more valuable than geopolitical power. It loses the  fundamental battle for the soul of America.

And what’s really left if you lose the heart of your country?

Ukraine might be winning the fight for its immediate survival – but under Trump, America is losing the fight for itself. 

The consequences of the former are far graver – immediate and devastating – but if the latter takes much longer, we’ll lose both.

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.

Stumbling through the pathway by my house, I chuckled to myself as I recounted what I’d just done.

Minutes earlier, I was getting hot and heavy with a very attractive gentleman, Jonah*, up against a fence. I don’t mean gentle kissing – we’re talking full-on fondling with one of my legs wrapped around his waist.

I was cracking up because he was not the first man I locked lips with that day – he was actually the third. In fact, I’d shagged the other two, but decided against making it a trifecta.

On that fateful day around 15 years ago – when I was in my early 20s – I woke up in bed with a gorgeous hunk named Steve*, who had the kind of smile that melts butter.

We would hang in the same social circles but weren’t exactly close friends. The sex was definitely casual.

Steve left around 10am after we spent several hours together between the sheets. His visit was welcome, though unexpected – particularly as I had a date arranged with someone else for that day.

Gentleman number two, also known as Freddie*, and I had known each other for a while. We met up around 5pm for drinks and I had a feeling we might shag, but it wasn’t a given.

The sex was good but very spur of the moment. Afterwards, I went to meet a few friends for drinks at a local bar.

That’s where I ran into Jonah. I had seen him around town but we’d never spoken before.

We ended up walking home together and well, you know the rest. Things nearly escalated to sex but given we were in public – and the fact that I was already a bit shagged out (literally) from my previous bedroom activities – I decided against it. 

I was still laughing as I walked through my front door, partly because I felt like the cat who got the cream and partly because I couldn’t quite believe my own actions.

However, I was surprised when, the next morning, I woke up feeling quite unlike myself.

I went to bed empowered, yet awoke feeling a little embarrassed.

Despite knowing that my actions the previous day hurt no one, and left me – and my sexual partners – feeling good, the familiar feeling of internalised misogyny began gnawing at me.

At this time in my life, I was studying abroad in a sunny town popular with backpackers. So most of my weekends were spent partying with friends and casual sex was pretty common in our crowd. 

We were young and horny – and the hot weather only made our feelings more intense. Having always been a sex-positive woman who believes every person has the right to enjoy their body to the fullest, I was determined to have as much fun as I damn well pleased.

So these feelings of shame were completely at odds with the proudly hedonistic lifestyle I was leading.

Later that day, I was retelling the story to a friend over drinks when a nagging feeling bubbled up inside of me. She didn’t say anything nasty – in fact, she mostly laughed and told me the whole thing was brilliant – and yet, I felt a tad uncomfortable.

Maybe I imagined it but I thought I saw a hint of silent judgement in her eyes. Thinking back, if I am truly honest with myself, I think that judgement came from within myself.

I was not ashamed of what I did, nor did I regret it. I still don’t.

But ingrained misogyny is hard to fight. Sometimes, it creeps back up just to make you feel bad about yourself.

After all, society has been telling women that we should be ladylike, proper and well-mannered ever since the day Eve supposedly bit the apple. 

And I’ve been called enough names over the years to know that a woman admitting to shagging two men within 24 hours will irk some people.

But ask yourself, would you care as much if I were a man? Probably not.

Even though I know I did nothing wrong, I would be lying if I said this experience of dealing with internalised misogyny didn’t shape some of my future sexual encounters. 

A few years ago, I was dating three men at the same time.

I didn’t keep anyone in the dark. I was very open about the fact that I was ‘playing the field’ and they were fine with it.

Though, once my relationship with one of them turned sexual, I ended it with the others. 

All my interactions with them had been respectful, and if I’d had sex with more than one of them, it would likely have been fine considering how open our communication was, but cutting things off with the other two men put my mind at ease. 

Therein lies the lesson. You should always do what feels right to you.

Therein lies the lesson. You should always do what feels right to you.

When I reflect on my time sleeping with Steve and Freddie, I can now see that I have nothing to be ashamed of. During that point in my life, my choices were completely appropriate. In fact, had I not slept with them, I might have regretted it! 

The whole experience taught me to never let anyone else’s opinions or society’s outdated views trump my own feelings. 

That being said, if you are going to have sex with multiple lovers, there are three things to keep in mind.

Firstly, you must be honest with everyone involved. 

Secondly, stay safe.

And finally, beware that you might have mixed emotions about your actions, like I did. The best advice I can give is to sit with your feelings for a while. 

Listen to yourself but silence other voices if they pop up in your head.

Remind yourself of this fundamental fact: You are the only person who gets to decide how many people you sleep with in one night, or during your lifetime.

*Names have been changed

This article was originally published February 7, 2025

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.

Amazon Prime’s Picture This is a near-perfect desi rom-com helmed by Simone Ashley.

But I’m ready to see a South Asian love story in all its glory.

The new movie, also executive produced by the Bridgerton star, is based on the Australian film called Five Blind Dates.

It follows our plucky and independent protagonist Pia as she attempts to bat away her mother’s encouragements to get married while trying to launch her photography business. 

But as her sister’s wedding celebrations get underway, she is reluctantly reunited with her childhood sweetheart Charlie (Hero Fiennes Tiffin) and, determined to avoid her unresolved feelings, agrees to five blind dates in a last-ditch attempt to find love. 

Along the way, she encounters arrogant businessmen, bachelors with mummy issues and yoga gurus with zero self-awareness. In short, a recipe for disaster. 

Picture This has all the ingredients of a classic rom-com, walking in the footsteps of beloved films over the years from 10 Things I Hate About You and 50 First Dates to more modern classics like Set It Up and Anyone But You.

The key difference? Simone’s trailblazing turn as a South Asian lead (already a rarity) fully embraces the vibrancy of diaspora culture.

There’s the complex desi mother who loves her children but is haunted by the pressures of the wider family and community; the lavish wedding packed with gorgeous outfits, poignant ceremonies and time-honoured traditions; and the mysterious family jewelry that appears on the eve of marriage. 

Needless to say, there’s plenty to celebrate about a mainstream rom-com with so much thought-out representation and brought together by a wonderful cast also featuring Sindhu Vee, Luke Fetherston, Anoushka Chadha and Asim Chaudry.

It’s no surprise since Simone has been vocal about her ambition to produce projects that champion underrepresented voices. 

‘I grew up watching rom-coms and I never really found many where there were women like me, who looked like me, leading them and playing the love interest.

‘I wanted to do that. I wanted to make a movie where I was the heroine in that sense of a rom-com, the Bridget Jones. So it meant a lot to me to do it. We had the most amazing crew and cast involved, and I’m just really excited to share it with the world,’ she told Drama Quarterly last year. 

And while she smashes the brief, I found there was one aspect of the movie that left me longing for more. A South Asian power couple at the heart of the story. 

In recent years, the British South Asian community has been making huge strides with its presence within the romance genre, largely thanks to rising stars such as Simone and, just as recently, Ambika Mod in One Day. 

However, from as far back as 2002’s Bend It Like Beckham, our dashing South Asian heroines across Hollywood have almost exclusively ended up in relationships with caucasian men. 

And while that is the reality for many, it would be heartening to occasionally buck the trend and have a sweet South Asian love story that can make it mainstream. 

We Are Lady Parts creator Nida Manzoor has paved some of the way in both her Channel 4 series and her recent indie feature, Polite Society, which both feature beautiful inter-community romances.

And shows such as BBC’s Virdee are even tackling the more complex and fleshed-out side of South Asian marriages, especially when the couple comes from different religious backgrounds.

But, for the most part, this is simply not the case, and we are a far cry from any sort of nuance entering the conversation.

It’s a complaint that’s been brewing for a while within the South Asian community. Hollywood star Mindy Kaling has fallen victim to this trope prolifically, from The Mindy Project to Never Have I Ever to Sex Lives of College Girls. 

Simone’s last character, Kate Sharma, falls in love with Anthony Bridgerton. Netflix’s Emma Morley falls in love with Dexter Mayhew. Even in Prime’s recent rom-com, How To Date Billy Walsh, with the other Sharma sister Charithra Chandran, we run into the same trouble.

And it works the flip side as well with Aziz Ansari’s Master of None, Kumail Nanjiani in The Big Sick, Dev Patel in Modern Love. 

It’s even found in the recent slew of LGBTQ+ movies that have hit the screen, such as Jonathan Groff’s A Nice Indian Boy, Amrou Al-Kadhi’s Layla and Ben Hardy’s Unicorns. Or, for a sapphic example, there’s Nasreen’s relationship in Ackley Bridge.

(I wish I could add even more examples, but the level of South Asians in romantic lead roles is already so few and far between.)

What’s more, this trope often comes at the expense of the South Asian counterpart.

In Picture This, at least initially, all Pia’s potential brown suitors come across as strange, backward and completely unsuited for a modern-day woman – with only Charlie meeting her standard. 

The idea of being with someone from our own community is the punchline of the joke and made actively undesirable in comparison to the main love interest.

Or the relationship is seen as outdated, whether it is portrayed as an arranged marriage nobody wants or a traditional couple who don’t know what’s good for them.  

To reiterate, there is a valid space for these love stories and by no means is this a call for these romances to stop.

But especially with South Asian talent finally reclaiming our narrative and leading the next generation of rom-coms, I would desperately love to see more romances that fully centre the desi community from start to finish. 

And, if the popularity of Bollywood among diaspora is anything to go by, there is definitely an appetite for more of these stories platformed within Western film and TV – centring our experience in whatever form it comes.

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.

With the world at a dangerous tipping point, I believe that using your voice is more important than ever.

That’s why I am proud to announce the launch of the Parliamentary Black Caucus, a bold new initiative that brings together Black and minoritised MPs and Lords from across the House with a shared mission: To tackle racial inequality, advocate for equity and justice for all, and ensure that Parliament reflects the rich diversity of the country it seeks to represent.

Parliamentary caucuses are informal, sometimes cross-party groups of politicians who work towards a common cause both inside and outside both Houses, such as the Women’s Caucus or the many All Party Groups.

The cross-party Black Caucus will work together to promote a fairer, more equal society in all areas, where Black communities are heard, respected and fairly represented – so that all our diverse communities can live better.

Founding members include myself, fellow Labour MP Diane Abbott, Conservative Lord Shaun Bailey, and the Lib Dems’ Josh Babarinde MP. 

As we take this significant milestone coming out of US Black History Month, I am honoured to work with and mirror the pioneering US Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), which has achieved huge progress in America over the years, and we look forward to working together.  

The CBC holds influential annual conferences, which I was honoured to attend myself in September of last year as a UK delegate.

Throughout its history the CBC has advanced civil rights and social justice for African Americans – whether through voting rights, criminal justice reform, healthcare equity and so much more.

I launched this initiative because, for far too long, issues affecting Black and minoritised communities have been underrepresented in policy and overlooked in decision-making. 

While progress has been made, with Parliament after the 2024 election now having its highest proportion of ethnic minorities, the persistence of institutional racism, socioeconomic disparities, and systemic inequalities is a reminder that our work is far from finished.

As the first ever elected Black female government minister in the UK, I am determined to do my part to help underrepresented communities. 

I played an instrumental role in giving the UK Youth Parliament the right to sit and debate in the House of Commons. Through my work on the Modernisation Committee, I am bringing about advancements in how our Parliament works for people of all backgrounds. 

I founded the Bernie Grant Leadership Programme, an extensive training programme designed to address the under-representation of Black, Asian and minority ethnic representatives at all levels of the Labour Party.

And I was honoured to become the first ever Black woman appointed to the Panel of Chairs – members are responsible for chairing Public Bill Committees, overseeing Westminster Hall debates, and acting as temporary chairs for Committees of the whole House.

With the Parliamentary Black Caucus, we want to advance meaningful change, both within Parliament and across the country.

Our mission is clear: to provide a united voice on the issues that disproportionately impact Black and minoritised ethnic communities, like addressing racial disparities in policing, immigration, education, healthcare, and housing or dismantling institutional barriers within the criminal justice system. 

We draw strength and inspiration from the struggles of Black campaigners for equality over the centuries. 

Bernie Grant, one of the UK’s first Black British MPs, set up the first Black Caucus. Together, they shattered glass ceilings and paved the way for people like me. 

We are committed to promoting strong and inclusive representation while prioritising action, because we do not need any more reports or talking – we know what problems exist, now is the time to act.

We can give a unique perspective on the impact of policy, regardless of political persuasion.

Black communities make the UK the successful, vibrant, and diverse place that it is today. 

We are politicians, doctors, nurses, bus drivers, artists, refuse collectors, entrepreneurs, journalists, judges, shop assistants, teachers, lawyers; the list goes on. We must tell that positive story. 

Despite this, we are still subject to structural racism. This needs to change. 

We have much work to do. The riots that took place across the UK last summer showed how emboldened racists have become in this country. We refuse to stand by and watch while our societies are polarised and pitted against each other. Enough is enough.

We will work towards a fairer society in which everyone, regardless of the colour of their skin, has access to the rights, services, and opportunities that they deserve.

Beyond the UK, we aim to unite with Black caucuses around the world, to promote the interests of people of African descent, on a global scale.

We are in a time of much uncertainty, and we face global challenges that we must work to address in a fair and just way. We believe that by addressing institutionalised racism and working to create a just society for Black communities, everyone will prosper. 

I always repeat the words, ‘without your rights I cannot have mine’. It’s not only about addressing what is broken; we need to build something better. 

By working together across party lines, we can bring our diverse perspectives and lay the groundwork for future generations of Black and minoritised leaders. 

Unity is our most powerful tool.

The Parliamentary Black Caucus will be transparent, engaging regularly with stakeholders, organisations, and communities. 

We will prioritise the voices and needs of those who often go unheard. And we will remain steadfast in our commitment to racial justice.

This is a movement rooted in the belief that diversity strengthens our democracy, and that we shouldn’t just tolerate differences, we should accept them. I am filled with hope, positivity and determination as we embark on this journey.

To the communities we serve, the Parliamentary Black Caucus is here to listen and to advocate on your behalf.

Together, we can build a future where fairness and equality isn’t an aspiration but a reality. The Parliamentary Black Caucus is how we can drive that change in Parliament and beyond.

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.

Eight million people live in New York City, just under 20 million in the state. And yet, I’ve never felt more isolated.

As Ukraine marks three years under relentless attack, I’ve found myself in a country that seems eerily indifferent to the suffering of my neighbours.

I may live in the US, but I am proudly British, proudly European, and absolutely, wholly, completely, proudly pro-Ukraine. Every day and every headline is a fresh betrayal, and I find myself mostly surrounded by people who don’t know, don’t care, or don’t understand.

One relative out here even questioned why I’m so invested in Ukraine’s sovereignty and told me that I would feel differently if it were my taxes funding it — seemingly completely unaware that Europe has contributed more to Ukraine than the US.

I try to remain levelheaded, but Trump’s decision to halt aid to Ukraine yesterday is the final betrayal — it’s a death sentence.

The callousness goes beyond Trump. Days after those scenes in the Oval Office, Marco Rubio accused Zelenskyy of ‘Ukraine-splaining’ when he dared to push back against US politicians undermining his country’s fight for survival. Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, used her platform to claim that Zelenskyy has ‘different aims’ beyond peace.

But the root of all this animosity tracks back to that infamous call in 2020.

Trump had a 30-minute phone call with Zelenskyy in which the Ukrainian President said his country was ‘ready’ to buy more weapons from the US. Trump responded: ‘I would like you to do us a favour though,’ before later asking Zelenskyy to ‘look into’ Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, and his business dealings with a Ukrainian company.

A whistleblower complaint of this exchange was later the basis for Trump’s first impeachment, which he was acquitted for.

Then, there’s the rest of them. JD Vance essentially argued that supporting Ukraine is a waste of resources and Americans ‘won’t stand’ for funding ‘the war forever’.

Republican members of Congress have openly spread and entertained Russian propaganda. It seems to me that the only ones willing to talk about Ukraine are those looking to plunder the country for its minerals.

And where the hell are the Democrats? There is zero leadership. The national party has slumped to the most embarrassing political communication I’ve ever seen — and I worked for the Liberal Democrats during the tuition fees fiasco.

Michelle and Barack Obama? I can’t see a single word. Hillary and Bill Clinton? Nothing meaningful. Jill and Joe Biden? Silent. Even George W. Bush, who knows a thing or two about illegal wars, doesn’t appear to have said anything.

Okay, a few — notably Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, AOC, and a handful of others — have been speaking out. But it’s not enough.

I am exhausted from constantly explaining why my continent’s survival — why Trump and Putin can’t just redraw geographical boundaries — should matter to Americans. 

This is not some distant conflict; if Ukraine loses, the world becomes catastrophically less safe. Putin and other dictators who dream of conquest will not stop at Ukraine. They will test the limits of Western inaction, and authoritarian regimes will take notes. US security, NATO’s future, and global stability all hinge on Russia’s defeat.

And guess what? If Ukraine does lose, where do you think all those refugees are going to go? The same people who dismiss this war as ‘not our problem’ will likely be the first to complain about an influx of displaced, desperate families seeking safety. So, if only for your own selfish reasons, start giving a flip about this war.

And let’s clear up another thing: Alliances are not one-sided. America rightly expects loyalty from its allies, but where is their commitment?

Vance can seemingly dub the UK ‘some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years’ (something he’s since denied), but when our once-closest ally needed us after 9/11, we responded without hesitation — and lost 636 brave British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is life and death. Every dollar withheld, every weapon delayed, costs lives. Each time you look away, you are complicit. 

Living here, watching my home continent under siege, has been isolating, frustrating, and depressing. But one good thing has come of it: I have never been prouder of my country.

Britain, while certainly not perfect, has stepped up in a way that sends shivers down my spine. I understand the difficult dance Starmer is doing, but seeing Zelenskyy welcomed in the way he was brought tears to my eyes.

Cheering crowds outside No 10 Downing Street; our Prime Minister embracing him on the streets, a seemingly small but powerful difference, as Prime Ministers tend to wait inside No 10 to greet leaders — it has been a masterclass in solidarity.

But still. The war goes on. Ukraine continues to be ravaged. And the most powerful country in the world is now looking the other way, pulling funding and – what appears to me – to be siding with Russia.

So I beg you. Do your bit — stop turning the other way. Stop scrolling past. Do not shrug off the destruction, do not ignore the bombed-out homes, and do not rationalise Trump’s appeasement.

Silence is complicity. And there is more than enough history to teach us that complicity leads to the darkest of places.

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.

After the long overdue resignation of Gregg Wallace on MasterChef there was clearly only one person who could save one of the BBC’s longest-running series from going up in flames – Grace Dent.

Wallace, 60, confirmed he was stepping away from MasterChef in November last year after the BBC received allegations of making inappropriate sexual remarks.

Several former contestants then came forward to share their uncomfortable experiences of working with Wallace and Sir Rod Stewart accused him of ‘bullying’ his wife Penny Lancaster when she competed on the celebrity series in 2021.

Wallace has denied the allegations but really pulled the plug on his career when he blamed ‘middle class women of a certain age’ for carrying the pitchforks and pushing the allegations into the spotlight.

Dent, 51, was then announced as host for Celebrity MasterChef, the obvious choice after building a devoted fanbase of all ages with her podcast, Comfort Eating, and a triumphant appearance on I’m A Celebrity.

Now it’s emerged Dent could be overlooked for MasterChef and MasterChef: The Professionals by Saturday Kitchen’s Matt Tebbutt, 51, a decent bloke and safe bet who would bring exactly the same energy as John Torode, keeping the show’s tradition of a bromantic duo at the helm.

And that’s a problem.

Dent is refreshingly engaged with the future of culinary broadcasting, regularly popping up on various TikToks, helping to platform aspiring new foodies with a voice.

She rates Michelin star meals with the same esteem as a really bang on fry-up at a local café and she’s got razor-sharp wit, which would be the perfect antidote for Wallace’s wince-inducing jokes that did make it to air – let alone the alleged ones so inappropriate they didn’t.

Dent began filming Celebrity MasterChef in January. Her future on the MasterChef franchise felt like a sure-fire deal and the perfect two fingers up at Wallace, who blamed ‘women of a certain age’ for his fall from (no pun intended) grace.

But, according to The Sun, Tebbutt is in advanced talks to take over Wallace on MasterChef and MasterChef: The Professionals.

There could be many reasons why Dent isn’t committing to all three editions of MasterChef but if I was the BBC and Banijay Entertainment – the production company that makes MasterChef – I would bend over backwards to have Dent as the face of MasterChef, even above Torode.

MasterChef isn’t just damaged by the Wallace allegations, it’s on life support. It needs an intensive rebrand and as much as Tebbutt is perfectly lovely to watch on Saturday Kitchen, having another middle-aged man presenting alongside its existing middle-aged male host is so obviously a bad idea.

Not to say Tebbutt isn’t reliable, but Wallace’s allegations aside, MasterChef has needed a strong female energy for years.

Monica Galletti presented MasterChef: The Professionals with Wallace from 2009 to 2021. She was briefly replaced by Anna Haugh for one series only before she returned as a judge for one more stint in 2023.

Galetti is one of the best chefs in the country but never really became the face of MasterChef, the brand still very much belonged to Wallace and Torode.

Dent became a MasterChef favourite by being comically scathing as a guest judge when contestants had to face a notoriously tough panel of restaurant critics renowned for being difficult to impress.

She was by far the most intimidating critic – unbearably stern and brutally honest. It was her job to terrify but over the years Dent has become better known for her humour, warmth and sharp intellect.

Her podcast celebrates everyday food with celebrity guests who often by their own admission are more Kendall Jenner than Nigella Lawson in the kitchen.

She’s making food more and more accessible, shattering the stigma that posh food is for posh people and that anyone with an educated palate should steer clear of a Pot Noodle.

That is exactly what MasterChef should be about.

Granted, Tebbutt managed to save Saturday Kitchen in the wake of James Martin’s exit, which is no mean feat.

Saturday Kitchen could have easily flopped after Martin launched his rival show on ITV in exactly the same time slot but instead he’s taken it from strength-to-strength.

Tebbutt is exactly where he needs to be.  

Dent, however, is on the rise and proving that even women of ‘a certain age’ can enter their 50s and thrive more than ever. MasterChef would be unbelievably foolish skip the chance to be the platform that makes her the star she’s bound to become one way or another, with or without its help.

Obviously, there is still a place for middle-aged men on television. I don’t want to sound like I believe Wallace is reflective of middle-aged men and we need to take them all off TV.

But MasterChef, particularly, needs a strong female leader. It needs to prove the days of Wallace are long-gone, that it’s returning with a completely new slate and it’s listened to the many women who came forward and made complaints, which date back years.

Is another middle-aged man the way to do this? God no.

But optics aside, Dent is so clearly the best direction for MasterChef and at this point, I really think the show needs her more than she needs it.

So much so there is an eerie chance it’s her decision not to present MasterChef and MasterChef: The Professionals, but if that’s the case, someone needs to pull out all the stops to convince her otherwise.

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 been planning my wedding for the past couple of months and it’s been a joy to do – although it does have its moments. 

We haven’t done everything by the book – we planned when and how we would propose so none of it was a surprise, and we decided against bridesmaids and groomsmen, because we wanted everyone to feel special. 

We thrive on being unconventional. But there’s one thing I really want for my wedding – an autumnal metallic colour scheme.

I think this specific colour palette will look gorgeous – the photos will look great and it’s just pleasing to look at. The colours will suit everyone too! 

But my fiancé is being blasé and dismissive about this colour theme. He won’t even tell his side of the family what colours to wear. I keep explaining that it’s the one thing I really want but he says ‘it’ll be fun to let people wear whatever they want’. 

Nothing else has been stressful about this wedding – it’s just this one thing I keep coming up against, and I don’t know what to do. 

How do I make him realise it’s really important to me? 

Tyra 

Dear Tyra,

It sounds like you’ve put a lot of thought into every detail of your wedding – and it’s wonderful that you take pride in being unconventional. That’s what will make your day truly ‘yours’.

It’s also clear that you feel very passionately about the colour scheme you’ve chosen; and that’s understandable. 

Your chosen colour palette reflects your unique vision, and I can see why it means so much to you.  

The palette you pick isn’t just about aesthetics – it is set to create a mood, tie the whole celebration together, and provide the picture-perfect backdrop for your photos.  

Your wedding is such a personal milestone, and you’ve clearly considered every element to reflect the individual love story you share. Your vision for the wedding is a beautiful reflection of your distinct perspective and should be celebrated. 

Given all this, I can see why it might be frustrating when one detail that you hold dear doesn’t seem to elicit the same opinion from your fiancé.  

He might view it from the perspective that a bit of freedom in the dress code allows everyone to express their individual personality in their own way – and it might be worth considering that some of your wedding guests may prefer wearing certain colours. 

They might feel that other tones don’t flatter them; and may feel pressured into wearing something they’re not comfortable with if your palette includes your guests’ outfits.

However, your passion for a particular colour scheme is a big part of your wedding vision, and your feelings must be acknowledged. 

Remember, relationships are about compromise, and you and your fiancé must be able to agree. There is always a middle ground that can blend your personality into a day that feels authentically yours. 

First, have a think by yourself about exactly why this particular colour palette feels so right to you. Perhaps these colours remind you of a special moment, or you believe they bring out the best in your chosen decor and venue.

Once you feel all this is clear in your mind, have an honest and open conversation with your fiancé in which you tell him why these colours are so important to you. 

You could then propose a compromise, like asking the immediate family or closest guests to follow your chosen palette while allowing other guests more flexibility.  

Alternatively, you could add a note in your wedding invitation encouraging guests to consider wearing an accessory that matches the colour palette. You could emphasise that this does not have to be mandatory; only if they feel like it.

It’s up to you whether you explain, in this note, that this would mean they’d be matching your chosen colour palette for the day. If you do make this clear, guests might jump at the chance to feel as though they’re helping you create your dream ‘look’ for the day.

Ultimately, finding a middle ground doesn’t mean one vision has to overpower the other. It’s about combining both your personalities into a day that feels authentically yours. Whatever happens, your wedding should reflect your unique love story. 

Try to welcome the conversations you have about this, going forward. Slight differences of opinion between a couple can be opportunities for a deeper understanding and better communication.

I wish you both all the best as you navigate these decisions – and I hope your big day turns out as beautiful as you imagined. 

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.

As I looked through the Oscar nominations, one category, and one glaring omission stood out. 

Saoirse Ronan, who has been snubbed for best actress. 

Of course, this has been a stacked year for actors vying for that coveted Academy Award nod with standout performances from all five stars who made the final cut – Mikey Madison (Anora), Cynthia Erivo (Wicked), Demi Moore (The Substance), Fernanda Torres (I’m Still Here) and Karla Sofía Gascón (Emilia Pérez).

But I couldn’t help but feel there was a gaping hole in that talented line-up after what should have been an acclaimed year for the 30-year-old Irish actor.

In 2024, the Little Women actor starred in not one but two major movies that clearly fit the bill for awards clamour due to the decorated talent associated with the projects and the impactful and unique take on the subject matters they were tackling.

These were memoir adaptation drama The Outrun and Steve McQueen’s World War Two saga Blitz (neither of which received any Oscar nominations).

In Blitz, Saoirse played a mother desperately trying to reunite with her son in war-torn England and brought her usual gravitas to the role. 

Although she is on top form in this movie – providing the viewers with weep-worthy scenes as much as moments of quiet reprieve – I appreciate it was perhaps not quite enough to secure her a nomination. 

Hollywood is seemingly becoming too accustomed to the steady stream of World War movies, even in this year’s race Tyler Perry’s Netflix blockbuster Six Triple Eight got only one nod, and even that was in the best original song category. 

And Blitz didn’t make quite the splash when it was released in cinemas despite a high profile and decent budget, quickly leaving mainstream discourse as it landed on Apple TV just weeks after showing in multiplexes. 

But what truly blew me away was how and why the Academy managed to overlook her powerful lead performance in The Outrun (for which she is Bafta-nominated).

The Outrun is based on the memoir by Amy Liptrot and recounts her recovery from alcoholism as she returns to her home in the remote Orkney Islands. 

Saoirse spends much of the movie alone and is undeniably the heart of every scene she shares with other actors as she evocatively portrays the torment of addiction in a jarring juxtaposition to the overwhelming beauty of her childhood home. 

There’s a tipping point in the movie when her character, Rona, is tempted to drink again while visiting her absent father that leaves you wanting to scream at the screen for her to turn away and save herself.

It’s a scene that flexes Saoirse’s skills, and stands alongside any of the sea of impressive moments from the best actress Oscar nominees.

From Cynthia Erivo’s soul-soaring rendition of Defying Gravity at the end of Wicked to the heated moment Demi Moore rabidly removes her makeup in body horror The Substance.

It’s been a powerhouse year where it’s difficult to have your voice breakthrough among the crowd, but Saoirse’s performance in the Outrun has truly stayed with me.

In the flashbacks to her life in London opposite Paapa Essiedu – where we dip into what she left behind and understand the desperation that drove her to this isolation – she perfectly captures the unnerving path she treads to completely losing control over her life. 

At its core, it’s one of those movies that leaves you slightly breathless and reluctant to step back onto the polluted streets of London after sharing the wild Scottish air with Saoirse for a couple of hours and revelling in its healing powers. 

This is far from the first time Saoirse has delivered such a stellar performance. And it’s far from the first time she hasn’t secured a potentially deserved statuette. 

I’ve been following her career since I was a child, and she deserves better. 

When I was 10, I remember feeling Ronan’s palpable fear in her disturbing role in the horror-thriller Lovely Bones, and the haunting impression she left behind. 

I remember the first time I watched Lady Bird, on the eve of moving out of home for the first time and feeling an affinity with her character over the turbulence of the changing mother-daughter dynamic and the fear of facing the future.

Watching Little Women, when I was 20, I shed more than one tear as she confessed her inner fears of loneliness to her mother in a society where a woman’s value is so wholly tied to marriage. 

Of course, Saoirse is widely acknowledged as one of the best of her generation, already collecting four Oscar nominations in her tender 30 years including for her aforementioned roles as well as Atonement (2008) and Brooklyn (2016). 

Although she is yet to secure the win, something she is all too aware of. 

‘I just think I’ve gotten so used to losing now, like I don’t win anything,’ she told Jimmy Kimmel in an interview at the end of last year. 

But after so much anticipation for 2025 to finally be the year she broke the curse, it is even more disheartening that she doesn’t even get a shot, especially with two incredible performances. 

If there’s one solace we can take from this year’s slew of nominations, however, it is that there are still many, many years for Saoirse to find the perfect project to finally secure her that statuette, especially now she is starting to produce her own projects, like the Outrun. 

After all, Demi Moore, 62, just landed her first Oscar nomination over four decades into her career – but hopefully it won’t take Ronan 30 more years to finally win. 

Sadly, Oscar snubs are just a fact of the annual ceremony, and this year was no different. There were plenty of eyebrow-raising omissions – like Challengers losing out on best original score, Payal Kapadia’s acclaimed All We Imagine As Light securing zero nominations and Margaret Qualley being snubbed on best supporting actress for her turn in The Substance.

But, for me, Saoirse stands out as one of the most galling. And although she doesn’t need an Oscar to define her worth in the industry, it’s about time the Academy gave the star her flowers. And a golden statuette to match.

This article was originally published on January 26, 2025.

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.