Women & Religion

I went to college in Cockfosters North London. It was close to Barnet & Finchley, a Jewish area, & I used to baby sit for Jewish families to earn money to see me through college. 

Orthodox Jewish religious law says that women should cover their hair when in the presence of men other than their husband or close family members. This can be a scarf, hat or wig. Not all Jews are orthodox. 10 - 15% are, with most in Israel. But the population is growing faster because of high birth rates - projections suggest 1 in 5 by 2040. Israels orthodox Jews, particularly the ultra orthodox Haredim, are growing rapidly & follow strict interpretations of Jewish law (Halakha), often living in segregated communities, wearing distinctive, traditional clothing, and focusing heavily on religious study. Women are not confined but they are expected to dress and behave modestly in public. When I was in Israel & the West Bank it was easy to see who were the orthodox Jews. They are very distinctive.

Muslim women are instructed to dress modestly, covering their entire body except for the face & hands, to honor principles of piety and privacy. This usually involves wearing loose-fitting clothing that does not reveal the body's shape and a headcovering (hijab), though interpretations vary regarding the strictness of covering. I have travelled in the Middle East extensively & always felt very uncomfortable seeing the women covered from head to toe in black flowing robes, often made of polyester. I adopted the covering rule, but wearing lightweight cotton & was still uncomfortably hot. In Yemen I was spat at & harrangued because my headscarf had slipped showing a little hair. But that was fairly isolated, most Middle Eastern countires were really hospitable.

Christians are not as focussed on modesty in women, but Amish, Mennonites, and some Catholic or Orthodox traditions encourage modest dress (e.g., covering shoulders, long skirts, head coverings). Historically, women wore chapels veils or head coverings

Hinduism & Sikism also emphasise modesty in women, hijab in Hindu traditions & humility with garments like the ghunghat or chunni often covering the head. 

Ostensibly many faiths use head coverings to symbolize humility and submission to God or higher spiritual authority. Additionally supposedly covering curbs the male gaze & disrupts objectification signalling the woman is not available.

I have a real difficulty in accepting that this fairly universal religious treatment of women is anything other than a form of patriarchal control and a means to blame women for male behavior. Some interpretations suggest the historical, cultural roots was to mark women as "respectable" (owned by a man) versus "unrespectable" (uncovered). 

There is argument as to whether the bible or the quran actually unambiguously requires women to cover their hair & bodies. The interpretation of the texts has been done by men. Men have dominated religion for milennia. I remember being in the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela after travelling the Way of St James. The only woman among a lot of clergy, in embroidered robes, officiating at the service, was a nun, in a plain grey habit, who led the singing. 

Some religions have become more female friendly, but there is still has a long way to go. Mary Magdalene was a prominent disciple of Jesus & was told by him to announce his resurrection according to the bible. But she has largely been dismissed as a prostitute rather than a model for redemption. 

Until religion really treats women in the same way as men & gives them equal standing, freedom & power in all ways I will continue to feel that, at it's roots, religion is misogynistic.

 

Therapy

I swim 3 or 4 times a week. Even if I feel rubbish I still go because I know that when I've swum I will feel better in both mind & body. Half an hour, 26 x 25m lengths of back crawl, and I'm physically freer & mentally relaxed. 

We all have to find ways to deal with 21st century life. Many of us have to find ways to deal with physical or mental issues. Having tried both conventional medicine & many alternative therapies for pain & fatigue, I do know what works for me & what doesn't. Having also had thankfully few periods of quite severe depression, I also know how that feels & what to do & what not to do. 

For example I am a great believer in osteopathy & chiropractic. I feel that practitioners know far more about the skeleton & muscles than GP's. That is not to denigrate GP's, they are what the name implies - general practitioners. Their job is to signpost where patients go next & hopefully give some relief. I also believe in accupuncture, good nutrition & the right exercise. Distraction technique & pacing works for me as well.

I feel that we all need to be aware of our bodies & take responsibility for our own health. Some things are very difficult, if not impossible to cure. So you do have to learn to live with some things. You also have to accept that you will die. That isn't being dismissive, it's being realistic. Sometimes our expectations of what the NHS can & should do are unrealistic. It isn't a cure all for everything. Sometimes life is just a bitch. 

I feel that we all need to be more pro active about our health. We should know if anything we are doing or not doing is contributing to illness. The information is out there, we just have to access it. We need to take responsibility for ourselves & not expect the "state" to solve our problems. There are limitations to what can & should be done for us. We need to be prepared to make changes to our habits if they are harming us. That really isn't easy. I doubt I will ever grow to love the Gym.

I think there needs to be a clearly understood contract between individuals & medics. Also between the NHS & the State. We all need to know what is possible & what is not & who is responsible for providing or not providing it. Our expectations are sometimes simply not realistic. Unless we are all prepared to pay more for the NHS it will continue to fall short of our expectations. 

As of December 2024, the NHS in England employed approximately 1.5 million staff. It is the largest employer in the country. As of July 2025, there were 6,229 open and active GP practices in England. As of early 2024, there were over 700 hospitals operating, (excuse the pun), in England. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) professions are not subject to mandatory state regulation, so it is difficult to pinpoint an exact number of alternative therapists in England. The NHS generally recommends only evidence-based complementary therapies such as acupuncture for chronic pain (headaches, migraines, back pain), and manual therapies like chiropractic or osteopathy. They are expensive & not many practices provide them. You can get free, confidential therapy on the NHS, primarily for anxiety and depression, through NHS Talking Therapies (formerly IAPT). Options include Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), counselling, and guided self-help for those aged 18+ registered with a GP. But there are long waiting lists. 

 

We seem to be a sick society. Approximately 2.8 million working-age people in the UK are economically inactive due to long-term sickness. Everyone needs to feel that they are valued & contributing. Everyone needs the social benefits of working with colleagues. Being isolated & without purpose is not good for us. The NHS is struggling to cope & is a political football. We all need to look after our own health. 

   

Dear God.....

Although I don't believe you are sitting there in heaven, at the pearly gates, waiting to tell me whether I can come in or not, I do think there is some sort of amazing grand design to the universe. I do believe there are lots of things we do not know or understand. I do have a spiritual side to my personality.

So, hedging my bets, I'm hoping that you will read this & maybe get your act together to sort out the mess we, so called sentient beings, have made of this wonderful world we live in. We have royally f..... it up.

I don't want to be vindictive, but there are so many people today who are really not following your directions about how we should live. Personally I wouldn't just consign them to hell. I'm really not into burning & torture, although it is possible that they deserve it. But really, couldn't you just send a thunderbolt or lightening to take them out painlessly & quickly? Surely that isn't beyond a god? I could easily give you a list in case you haven't noticed, or are really busy? Maybe you don't you think it's your job to re-balance good & evil?

 

Another thing that might help get us out of the deep s... we are in is if you could send a few more really intelligent, curious, caring babies to grow into people who might just help us accept that we know what the problems are & in many cases we know what the solutions are. We just need to actually do what is necessary & b..... quickly. I can't believe that this "tipping point" "end of the world" scenario is what you had in mind. Or maybe you think the natural world will just be better off without us? Armageddon & all that. But that does seem a bit drastic for a god.

That leads us to religion, god. Did you really intend there to be so many different monotheistic & polytheistic, male dominated, faiths? They just end up arguing & even warring. That doesn't seem like a good plan for a god to me. Did you think it through? If you are really omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, surely you could have worked all of this out? I would have thought you didn't even need to do a risk analysis, can't a god see the future? I suppose you thought choice would be a good thing for us. But it really hasn't worked, has it? It's like the supermarket aisle with dozens of yoghurts to choose from. We just end up glazed over & confused.

I'm really not sure we are going to be able to sort this out for ourselves. I do think you should consider stepping in. My grandchildren & children everywhere deserve a non distopian future. 

Just give it some thought. But don't hang about. We don't have centuries.

 

Inspiration from Greenpeace "Letters Live" @ the Royal Albert Hall on April 22nd.  

Saying Sorry

I had a conversation with female friends the other day about apologising. It was very interesting. Although my grandsons will possibly be annoyed if they ever read this, we all thought that men find it more difficult to apologise than women. In fact women often apologise for things that they shouldn't, just to keep the peace. 

Research does indicate that women apologise more frequently than men. It is thought that this is due to different perceptions about what is offensive - Women have a lower threshold as to what constitutes offensive behaviour. Women are more likely to apologise for serious or emotional situations. Research suggests women may be more focused on maintaining harmony in relationships, while some men might feel that apologizing is a sign of weakness.

When my husband was alive I certainly felt the there was an imbalance between us in our view of what warranted an apology. Fortunately we still managed to have a good relationship, despite me feeling that getting an apology was like getting "blood out of a stone". 

Apologising in appropriate situations is important. We all need to take responsibility for mistakes or hurt caused. I just do not think that it is appropriate to apologise for something that the apologiser was not responsible for. So, for example, I don't think that countries can apologise for something wrong that happened historically. I also don't think an individual can apologise for someone else.

The current political spat between Starmer & Robbins is unedifying. It's a face off between supposed different perceptions of what happened. It reveals a pressurised culture & how difficult it must be to work at the top level of government when dealings are not transparent. It isn't good enough to have "plausible deniability" & lack of an honest & accurate record of what has happened. That enables individuals to evade responsibility. Good record keeping takes time, but it appears that there was a deliberate decision or instruction not to do that in this case. In todays tech world it is not difficult to record a meeting, unless instructed not to do so.

 

Frankly no one comes out of this well. It stinks! Starmers "apology" just isn't good enough.

Secrets & Lies

Although telling the truth seems to be a good aim to have, it isn't always possible. There can be valid reasons to either avoid the absolute truth, or even massage the truth. Information can do harm and good. People can be hurt by knowing the truth. We try to avoid doing that if we are sensitive to the feelings of others.

On the other hand I do think that knowingly lying is to be avoided at all costs if possible. Over my lifetime politics has changed immesurably. When I was younger there was a code of behaviour that was adhered to by most politicians. There was two way respect I think, us for them & vice versa. I'm sure there were secrets & lies that the public were not aware of. But the franchise transaction was that politicians acted in the best interest of the country & the people.

I struggle to believe that is true anymore. 

Politicians, for whatever reason, do not answer direct questions directly. They obfusticate & answer an entirely different question that was not posed. They are schooled to do that. It is deeply annoying & frustrating. They are actually the architects of their own public mistrust. Frankly they deserve what they get. Honesty would actually be very refreshing. 

Then there is "political plausible deniability" - a strategic tactic allowing leaders to evade responsibility for controversial, unethical, or illegal actions by ensuring no direct evidence links them to it. By utilizing ambiguous communication, surrogates, or fragmented chains of command, officials can credibly claim ignorance if the action is exposed, shielding themselves from accountability. The thing is that we know. They have been rumbled. We aren't idiots. This is the age of communication & investigative journalism. Sooner or later the truth usually emerges.

I have listened to the emerging information about the appointment of Mandelson as American ambassador for the UK. It is not black & white, there are shades of grey. But it does appear that Olly Robbins was "thrown under a bus" unfairly. People with more experience that me say clearly that "there was no abuse of process", not only was there no duty to disclose, but  the vetting system would collapse if they did. 

The issue for me is, given Mandelsons unsavoury history, I would have thought that a prime minister or the Foreign Office would have bent over backwards to ensure that this situation would not arise. Surely someone felt the need to ask detailed questions about possible outcomes of the appointment? 

This is a mess of the systems making. I can see that Enhanced Developed Vetting is deeply personal & private, but surely the buck stops with the Prime Minister & or the Foreign Secretary who ultimately make the appointment? There should have been questions asked without the necessity of private detail being revealed. 

I am amazed that this has been the way the UK runs vetting for years. Australias system is supposed to be very good. Maybe we should look at that. 

 

This week is going to be interesting if Olly Robbins appears before the Intelligence & Security Committee. 

Budgeting & Debt

I am in the fortunate position of knowing that my outgoings are covered by my income. It was not ever thus. I can remember, in my early marriage, we had no savings at all & all income was spent on the necessities of life, food, heating & rent for example. I can remember having egg & chips several times a week because it was cheap & filling. Everything was cooked from scratch & there were no "cook chill" meals. I wouldn't have been able to afford them even if there had been. We didn't go out for coffees & meals. Having a baby after just over a year of marriage put an extra strain on the household budget. I could no longer work.

As time went on both my husband & I had professional jobs & our income increased. We got on the housing ladder & left renting. We were able to save. Mortgages were manageable. Looking back my generation were lucky. But we did work hard for it & there were costs that were not financial. I felt I was like a hamster on a wheel juggling work, a home & family & elderly parents. 

We were quite frugal. We concentrated on the family, home & friends. We didn't have the many ways there are now to spend money. Life has changed substantially. There is more "stuff". Occasionally we bought big items on hire purchase, but basically we saved up for things we needed & wanted & paid cash. We didn't get into credit card debt because as far as I can remember we didn't have credit cards. The Barclaycard was introduced in 1966. The Access card came in in 1972. The 1980's & 90's started the widespread public adoption and reliance on credit cards. It also started the widespread reliance on credit card debt. 

As of early 2026, outstanding credit card debt in the UK has surpassed £70 billion, figures show a steady rise from previous years. Recent data indicates a 4.5% year-on-year increase in debt, while around 2.5 million UK adults are in persistent credit card debt. I find that truly shocking. Fiscal debt has become a way of life not only for individuals, but also for countries. Why should people manage their finances effectively if politicians think that fiscal debt is fine? The example is clear to see. Spending money you don't have is fine. Who needs to budget wisely if politicians don't?

A budget is a financial plan outlining projected income and expenses over a specific period, used to track spending, increase savings, and make informed financial decisions. I used to have a Boots diary which had an accounts section in the back that I filled in every week, so I knew where the money was going. It was a habit I learnt from my mother in law. I was obsessed with not overspending. There were very few luxuries. I made clothes for me & my daughter & even made a suit for my husband.  I cooked from scratch every day. We didn't pay people to work for us, we did our own maintenance on the house & the car. We managed to keep within our means & even save.

So we were able to move into better houses & profited from increasing values. 

It seems to me that today people want instant gratification. They have higher expectations of what the necessities of life really are. The concept of waiting until you have the money or lowering your expectations seems to have vanished. 

 

I'm really not sure that has made us happier.  

 

 

Strikes or Work to Rule?

I am struggling to find any reason to understand or support the UK resident doctors strike. Presumably everyone could argue that their pay had gone down in real terms since 2008 /9. To be clear, that's 18 years.

It's been a period of financial disasters. The Global Financial Crisis of 2007/8, the Great Recession of 2008/10, Brexit 2020, Covid 2020/21, the Cost of Living crisis 2022......Why should the doctors feel that they have a better case for pay increase than anyone else?

I appreciate the work all medics do. But there are a lot of people in caring professions I also appreciate, teachers, carers, nurses, social workers, all first responders....I would argue that all of these are vocations. All of them should seriously consider the impact of their strike action on other people, or they may well be held to be simply completely self interested. That is not what we expect from caring professions. I can see a justification for working to rule, because all of these professions only work effectively because of good will. But 15 strikes in 3 years. That is an appalling record & nothing to be proud of. 

It is important that any workers have the right to air grievances & negotiate pay & working conditions. I do think that unions & professional organisations have an important role to play in protecting their members. Individuals have very little power, but acting together empowers all. That right is important, but should not directly endanger the health or life of others. There should be effective alternatives such as negotiation, mediation & arbitration, entered into in good faith by both sides.

The mechanism should not be mechanised & turned into war. 

There has to be realism on both sides. It seems to me that not just the UK, but the whole of Europe is in a dire financial situation. There is widespread instability & disaffection with politics & politicians. Everyone's infrastructure is creaking under the load of population growth & change. Managing an economy must be a poisoned chalice in the face of international wars affecting everything. There will be very difficult choices as to where the money we have goes. It's mostly borrowed money anyway. We no longer have big gold reserves or a booming economy.

We will all have to face up to that. The resident doctors are ignoring the reality of the situation we are all in. It is blindly selfish & unaffordable to ask for a 26% pay rise.