Woman's Hour - 20/05/2025

Episode Date: May 20, 2025

The programme that offers a female perspective on the world

BBC Sounds music radio podcasts. Hello, this is Newland McGovern and you're listening to the Women's Hour podcast. It is indeed. Hello and welcome. Well, in just a few minutes, we're going to hear why some are campaigning for an amendment to the Victims' Courts and Public Protection Bill when it comes to women reporting more than one sexual offence. Also today, shopping addictions.

They can be trivialised as retail therapy, but the unrelenting craving to purchase items can severely impact people's lives and their livelihoods. For one woman, it took years before she received a diagnosis of bipolar. To help with her addiction, we'll hear why, and also what happens when they are trivialised. Tradwives love them or loathe them. They are taking up quite a bit of space on social media.

I'm talking about traditional wives, women who embrace and live by traditional gender roles within marriage, often prioritising domestic chores or homemaking over external careers. They are hugely popular online. You might have seen the Tradwives content. Ballerina Farm is one that comes to mind. And their curated domesticity can be fun to watch, though we realise it's not actually based in reality. But do you seek it out? Why? Does that content resonate with you?

Is there any appeal of more traditional roles, even if you have an external career? Why might that be? Or do you run a mile at the thought of taking on a traditional gender role within the home, but you still perhaps scroll those accounts? You can text the program, love to know your thoughts on it. The number is 84844 on social media or at BBC Woman's Hour or you can email us through our website. For a WhatsApp message or a voice note that number is 03700 100 444. Also today we will get the latest on Gaza, the developments over the past 24 hours and also hear about the women and the children that are facing malnutrition. But let me begin with the story of survivors of a sexual assault. Some are questioning why they're being

cross-examined at trial about the fact that they made a previous disclosure of another sexual offense by a different perpetrator. The Centre for Women's Justice, Rape Crisis and other women's groups have launched a campaign to clarify the law around this. They are concerned that when victims and survivors disclose that they have suffered more than one sexual offence that it could be suggested that they're not telling the truth when in fact there is nothing at all to indicate that the previous disclosure was false. It's quite complicated, this story, so we're going to speak to Catherine Hall, an independent advisor on sexual violence to the government and a professor of criminology at City St. George's University in London.

There is the second reading of the Victims Court and Public Protection Bill taking place today and the campaign, as I was mentioning a few minutes ago is looking for an amendment to the bill. Catherine welcome. So talk me through a little bit about why this campaign is needed. So there are various issues at play here. Perhaps the best place to begin is when a rape or a sexual offence comes to trial, there are certain protections to the defendant to make sure that the evidence hurt by the jury is reliable. If the defense believes that the witness called, and that could be the

victim, isn't telling the truth, there's something to suggest that they might not be telling the truth based on their bad character. They're allowed to bring that up and that is right and important. So very specifically for rape, what that means is that if there is some evidence that this victim has previously made a false allegation of rape. The defence can apply to include that in the evidence and then that victim is asked about this. This is fair and right. But what the issue is, is that that's being abused and used to bring in when there is no suggestion at all of a false allegation, but merely that there previously was a bad experience rather than a bad character.

Because that is the bit that stands out to me, Katrin, as you explained that the false allegation that would have been proven to be a false allegation in the way it was supposed to be used. Yes, so if there is some evidence to suggest it might have been a false allegation that can be brought in so that could be a previous conviction but it could be some other material that would suggest that this victim has lied about being raped in the past. That's what the law is intended to do and that's correct that needs to happen that's essential to a fair trial. Now what I have observed and what the victim sector rape crisis in the Centre for Justice has observed is that this law is misread and misused as a

strategy by the defence to derail victims in the cross examination. So what happens is there might have been a previous disclosure of rape to the police. It might not even have been by the victim themselves. It might have been by a third party. It could have been it came up as part of the investigation that they said this is difficult for me because I've had experiences of this in the past. And then an application is made to the judge to say I I want to cross-examine this victim about this previous disclosure. The defence themselves might not even believe it was false, but merely bringing into

the evidence what it does is it creates a trial within the trial, where now the trial is no longer about the defendant in this case, the trial is now about the victim and whether they might have lied in the past. So imagine you've prepared yourself to give evidence in this trial and then you are ambushed and it is put to you that you are a liar, that you have made up things in the past when you have done nothing of this sort and there is nothing to suggest you have done this. All there is is a recording that you've previously experienced rape or sexual assault. I suppose the first question that comes to mind though is that allowed because by the

characterisation that you give it has not been used in the way that you believe it was intended. So our reading of the law and that of confirmed by the Court of Appeal is that this is not allowed. So merely the fact that there was a previous disclosure even if in this previous case the victim has withdrawn that report which is very common so six out of victims decide not to go ahead with a with a prosecution after they reported. And even if the police closed the case, which is the case for two, three out of the remaining ones, is that police say there isn't enough evidence, there's

nothing to suggest it's wrong, but we just cannot prove it in law. So that Court of Appeal has ruled that that in and of itself is not material to suggest it's a false allegation. It merely is a previous report that didn't go anywhere. And as we know, rape convictions are so low. So it's actually the most common outcome, the most likely thing that will happen when you report is nothing. The most likely thing is the case will not go further. So and the defense then suggests, oh, this case didn't go further.

You withdrew it. The police closed it. They try and construe that as material to suggest it was false. So and I want to hear about how it has impacted women. But but leading on from your point there, what is it that you want to happen to close a sort of a loophole? Yes so clearly the law already doesn't permit this there is previous caseloads so previous decisions of judges in this case from the court of appeal to confirm it shouldn't happen but in practice the law is applied inconsistently by judges. Despite this guidance existing, that suggests to me that the text of the law itself needs to be

clarified. There is also another element to this in that it doesn't just impact survivors once they go to trial, it actually impacts from the moment of reporting. So from anecdotal evidence I've heard in my role and from that rape crisis frontline workers who support survivors have seen is that police often don't proceed with a case because there's a previous report because they're already preempt that this might undermine the case. And the sector says the same goes for the Crown Prosecution Service. They pre-empt that this might be undermining the case in future, so they already close the case and don't take it forward. So it's got a ripple effect that goes right across the justice

system, not just at trial. So what are you looking for specifically? An amendment to the law that clarifies very clearly in the law that there needs to be evidence, some material to suggest there is a false allegation and that can't be so specifically mentioning, that can't be that a previous case has been withdrawn, that can't be that police couldn't find enough evidence to substantiate it and to therefore ensure that the law is read as intended because what we are seeing now is that it's not read as intended. So really you need a firmer interpretation on what a false allegation is. Yeah and one reason this might be the case is that

our knowledge of sexual violence has really advanced much faster than the law has moved. So in the past, when we have far fewer women speaking out about sexual violence, there was this sense that it would be incredibly rare for this to happen to someone twice. So somebody to report twice seemed to be something terribly unusual. And that's perhaps where the law is stuck. But we now know through the research that actually experience sexual violence more than once is incredibly common.

The National Office of Statistics confirms that one and two of those who experienced sexual violence say they've experienced it more than once. Rape crisis of the survivors they support, say nine've experienced it more than once, rape crisis of the survivors they support, say nine out of ten say it's experienced more than once, police's own data suggests at least a quarter of what's recorded in their data this victim has previously experienced it. So the text of the law is really out of step now with what we know, how common it is. Well, the law may be out of step, as you mentioned,

but there may be some listening that go, really, is that happening that people might report more than once, that they might see it as somewhat suspicious? What would you say? It really isn't in that if you've experienced sexual violence, very sadly you are actually now at greater risk of it happening to you again. We know that if you've experienced child sexual abuse, it hugely increases your risk of sexual violence in the future. The same risk factors that might have exposed you to greater risks of being victimised in the first place might still be persisting. We

know that the risk of sexual violence is, for example, greater for people with disabilities. There is also some evidence to suggest that minoritized and racialized people will be at greater risk. So the same factors might play out more than once. So it's not actually a coincidence necessarily. And just for people to be, might be coming to this story for the first time, this can be an allegation of a sexual offence against a completely different perpetrator, a completely different time of your life or geographical area, or it can be a completely different case. Exactly, and that is what the issue is, is that it's a completely different case, a completely different defendant, a completely different case. Exactly, and that is what the issue is, is that it's a completely different case, a completely different defendant, a completely different context. No similarity. The only similarity

is that both times you've been victim, a victim. And I think there is a little bit of a rape myth playing out here. There is what? A bit of a rape myth playing out here that somehow you ought to blame for this to happen. So rather the communality is you, so therefore the blaming is on the victim. So suddenly it's your bad character that you've had this bad experience. You've talked about working in this area. What have women told you? I haven't spoken to women directly, so my understanding comes from countless specialist rape investigators, it comes from observing trials, and it comes from talking to frontline

victim support sector workers. What they're saying is that for the victims, this is an incredibly awful experience, because it brings back to you something you might have tried to put to one side and move forward from. It derails you when you're trying to cope with something that already is incredibly stressful which is to be involved in an ongoing rape investigation or trial. So the sense of injustice is so grave and it almost adds insult to injury. Not only did your previous report perhaps not get taken forward and seriously, now the fact that it might have not been taken forward and taken

seriously last time is taking your current case out at Denise. So that's compounding the issue. How hopeful are you, Katrin, that you will get the amendment you're looking for? I don't know whether we'll get it. What I do believe is that it's absolutely imperative to act when there is something that's clearly not working. There is a vehicle available to change it, which is to change the law. It's of no cost to the taxpayer. It won't burden the justice system anymore, if anything it will reduce it. So I can't really see a case for not changing the law in that it's a clarification of the law. It's not really

changing the law as such. It's making it clearer so it gets applied much more correctly. We did get a statement from the Ministry of Justice that says this government has pledged to have violence against women and girls in the next decade. We're determined to improve the experiences of victims at court. The Law Commission is currently reviewing how evidence is used in sexual offences case. We will carefully review their recommendations to help ensure victims receive the support and justice they deserve. Have you had much push back to what you are requesting? So in my role as independent advisor I speak to not for government and my conversations are confidential so I can't disclose what the reactions would be. What I can talk about is what I myself

think and I obviously think that this is something that must be addressed and there is little reason to delay in my view. Catherine Hall thank you so much for coming into the Women's Hour studio and I do want to let people know if you've been affected by anything you've heard today in our discussion please go to the BBC Action Line where there are links and support available. I've been asking you for your thoughts this morning when it comes to trad wives. Lots of you getting in touch already. Let me see. I can't imagine myself ever seeking out traditional roles for women.

My husband does all the cooking except baking because he enjoys it. We share the other household roles depending on how we feel on any particular day. Here's Bethany, Serbton. Women are now expected to have a successful career alongside coping with what is almost always an unfair share of household admin and maintenance. Despite our success in the workplace we sometimes dream of not having to do it all. I'm a career woman, mother, sometimes feminist. I'd like to talk to you more about that, Bethany. Even and I even find myself drawn to this content depicting a life pared down.

It is very beguiling. Well, 84844, if you'd like to get in touch. Leanne Child's novel, The Trad Wives Secret, is inspired by influencers who believe in traditional gender roles in marriage known as tradwives, as I was mentioning on social media. So traditional wives, the online content of influencers hugely successful. Ballerina Farm, for example, a woman with eight children and 10 million followers. She's on Instagram and you get these kind of tranquil domestic settings. These lovely kids, well-beh behaved kids and food cooked from scratch.

So is this just a wholesome pastime that we're scrolling through or dangerous sexist regression? What is the appeal to the millions of people who follow the trad wives? Leanne Child, I should say, joins me along with the British. Charlie can tell me when she agrees with this or not. Traditional Housewife and Influencer, Charlie Gray. Good morning, Leanne. Good morning. Good morning, Charlie. Good morning. Good to have you with us.

What do you think about that name, traditional tradwife first? Do you subscribe to it? No. But my mother was a traditional housewife and she proudly wrote Housewife on forms, filling them out when it asked for her occupation. So I very much grew up with that. But I teach practical skills to anyone that wants to learn them to make life easier because I think life is really busy. It's really hectic. We're juggling loads of things. And I do think there is a place for these traditional skills.

Yes, definitely. We can talk about that. But I'm going to come back to you, Charlie, and some of the skills that you do impart. I am in awe of them being, I don't know, what's the opposite of a domestic goddess? That's what I am. I think that's me as well. But I am in awe of some of the skills that people have. Why are you so interested in the concept of a trad wife, Leanne? Well, I think I'm a wife and a mother, but that's probably where the similarity ends. I'm a terrible cook and I work. And I think that I can look at the content online and actually really get drawn in.

And why do you think? I don't really know I think well aesthetically it looks really lovely and I think but I think there's the element of wow they can do it you know I'm not looking I'm thinking gosh you got eight children and you live in the middle of nowhere I'm looking at you and thinking you know you look like you're really healthy and your kids were really well behaved and you cook well the food does look really healthy and your kids were really well behaved and you cook, well the food does look really delicious and you know I kind of get myself drawn in and think well you know I

don't sure I'd be able to do that so therefore you're kind of better than me in that sense and which I think is actually you know if I actually sit back and think about it I don't believe that but when I'm actually watching it I do do believe that so it's kind of a suspended belief in reality You decided it would be a good theme for a novel. Yes, I did because I mean I think well It's a really topical subject for a start and really interesting like that but it's also that sense of is is it more dangerous than it looks because it doesn't look dangerous, it looks lovely, really wholesome and beautiful and you know but does that make it more dangerous?

Why do you call it dangerous? What are you alluding to specifically? So a lot of tradwives will talk about being submissive to their husband and there is that kind of idea of patriarchy in the family when he's the decision-maker and that I think is dangerous and I think there will be lots of women out there who will be really interested in how to make your ice cream and sourdough who wouldn't subscribe to that view but if they're starting on that road would they then move towards believing that view because by association with those things and I think it's a really easy way for it there's an I feel like there's an element

of recruitment going on you know really yeah because of the algorithms that we might be subjected to I think that these people who describe themselves as tradwives online they're not looking to recruit directly, what they're looking for is likes and follows and engagement. But to be able to get that, they need the support of the algorithms and the algorithms want a level of controversy, they want that, you know, to be kind of interesting content in that sense. And so they're almost, you know, they make themselves look beautiful and potentially attractive to people. Attractive is the word, I think, in all of it, not just the person, but the house and

the dinner, for example, which might pull me in. It's really interesting. Hold that thought for a minute, Leanne. I want to bring you in, Charlie. First, let's hear about what sort of content you make on social media. I teach practical skills from cooking, cleaning, ironing, sewing, bit of gardening, all those sorts of things. And it started, well, the idea came to me because we had au pairs for our children. We had three children under the age of two and it was crazy. So we enlisted an au pair to come and help and she couldn't even boil an egg so then I found myself with an extra child to teach how to do these things and that's when I realized actually practical skills haven't been passed down through the

generations like they used to be and actually I found that people were asking me to show them how to do things and I started cookery courses and things like that from my kitchen at home and it's just over the years grown and people are enjoying the content. Sorry to interrupt you there Charlie, I'm really curious what do you think people want to learn the most? Mainly how to cook and I think that that has because of ultra processed food, UPS, you know, there's been a big movement into not eating ready meals, not having microwave meals and actually cooking from scratch but those skills haven't been passed down and so I teach a lot of cookery, I've got online courses and that is probably the most popular thing and, if we look after our body and put good food in,

then we're going to feel better and be healthier. So I think that is really important and that is the most important skill, I think. So with some of the aspects and Leanne, of course, is bringing up a novel and she's talking about what inspired her with some of those connections. But I'd be curious curious do people ever assume that you are subservient to your partner? I haven't actually had that I think my husband and I have a great marriage and he's very very hands-on and he will cook he will wash up he's really involved with the kids so we don't have that kind

of marriage and actually people haven't assumed it. I try through my social media not to show everything being perfect. So I will show up sweaty faced, looking a mess, because I think it's really important not to portray a perfect life, because that is dangerous. But do you feel any affinity with the likes of Ballerina Farm, for example, I mentioned her. I know Estee Williams is another one. There's so many. You don't have to go too far online before seeing these people that have huge followings.

I really admire Hannah Ballerina Farm. I think she's created a phenomenal business and, you know, she isn't just a trad wife. She's running a phenomenal business with her husband and all credit to her. I mean, that's true. Trad wife. Back to you, Leanne. She could be called, and we're just talking about in general here, but so many of those very successful trad wives, media tycoons.

Yes. And I mean, Hannah Neelam is, I mean, she's a very kind of impressive woman and she has achieved so much. And I mean, the jury is still slightly out even in my head because I can look at Ballerina Farman and you know, Charlie is right that she has created an empire, but she's also got eight children under and she's like 32 or something. And she, I remember reading that the only one that she had any pain relief with in childbirth was the one that her husband wasn't there for. And then

these are little tidbits of kind of information that are just quite interesting, I think. So, you know, I am still impressed with her. Like even after doing all the research I've done, I can still look at ballerina farm reels and think that looks just amazing. But, you know, I'm also cautious about having that view because you just you don't know what goes on behind the scenes, behind the scenes really. Well, that's I mean, a really big part of this. And Charlie alludes to it there saying she doesn't want to portray this perfect life. But in your novel, you say nothing is as it seems. Was there ever such an understatement? Yeah, exactly.

I mean, obviously I'm writing a thriller. So there's twists and turns and the secrets and so on. But the idea is that certain people in society who are perhaps vulnerable to be manipulated, and I would say all my research is done in the States rather than in the UK. So, you know, I think perhaps it's a bigger, more extreme kind of issue over there than it is here. And I think it sort of dovetails with other

kind of social issues going on over there in general. But yeah, I feel that there is this kind of danger that people will believe that there is this kind of danger that people will believe that this life is perfect and it is attainable and actually it's really not. It's performative. Yeah. Some of the messages coming in, I want to come back to that performative aspect with you Charlie in a moment. Helen says, what no one seems to realize is that trad wives have a job creating content and then monetizing it takes a lot of time. That is their job. Another one,

performative wives I think is more accurate instead of trad wives. It wouldn't be such a fun life if you didn't have an audience. They perform a curated life and we watch, fascinated. We are their oxygen and also a lifeline to a desire for an identity outside the privacy of the domestic arena. Another one. I think it's good that skills of housewives are being celebrated who have often felt that if they're not working outside the home that they're somehow lesser. Creating a happy home with healthy food and balance is an art form to be celebrated. I agree it doesn't always have to be the woman who does this, but I have noticed

with my husband that I tend to be better at it. I can't say that I am, but Charlie, let me go back to you. Are you performing every time you pop something up? I suppose there is a little aspect of that, yeah, I suppose there is. I am very much what you see is what you get. So I haven't changed for the camera. And I don't feel like I'm performing, but yes, I will probably put a smile on my face. And maybe when I'm chopping an onion without the camera on, I'm probably not smiling so much.

But I really share what I do in our real life. And I'm sharing these tips to make life easier, sharing about batch cooking and planning ahead and things like that. Because as I mentioned earlier, it is a juggle. It's stressful when you've got children running a home and being a housewife is a very, very busy, important role if a wife or husband chooses to do that.

And I know many people whose wives are out working as a breadwinner and the husband is at home. So, you know, for me, it's sharing these tips and tricks and practical skills to make life easier. Do you think what you or others show is in fact an unattainable lifestyle? I don't believe so, no, because I managed to run a business and do these things. So I don't think it is unattainable at all. No, it takes organizing, though, being organized and planning ahead. Were you always organized?

Yes. And I've always been a nurturer. I've always loved making a home feel really homely and cozy. So many messages coming in on this. Leanne, let's read a few more. And Charlie, Ellie says, I went back to work after a year of maternity leave and I felt like I'd been missing out on the short period of life where my daughter is small since putting her in nursery in February. I've just made the decision to quit my job to look after her full time which sits so much better with my maternal instincts. I don't think this makes me a proud wife but I do

feel lucky to be in a position where we can do this as I know lots of friends who would like to if they could afford to. Of course that's a really big aspect. Sarah, I gave up a career in policing to start a family with my husband. I've never felt more job satisfaction and often get tired being asked, yes, but when are you going back to work? I think it's sad that our society doesn't consider homemaking a proper job. I can't imagine a better lifestyle for me anyway. I only wish it was more valued in society as a job in itself.

But I suppose that's Sarah there. But of course, being able to manage on one wage is one thing. Charlie is different. She has her job. She's monetizing from the job that she's doing homemaking. Jill from Norfolk. I work full time and I do all of the housework. I envy those who are able to do just one thing or another. Having it all is too much and I would rather be a trad wife. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, we were sold this idea that you can have it all.

And actually, it's actually really hard to have it all because having a job and women are still kind of still running the home as well. I mean, from my own personal experience, you know, I've always worked. I have two children. I pretty much run the home as well. So there have been times when my kids were younger, where it was actually really, really hard work. And I could understand that whole sense of if we could just drop one of those things. Personally, I think as kids get older that becomes less of an issue and it's actually good to have kept my career going through that time. But I do understand the opinion. I do think it's different. Being a stay at home mum is different from being a tradwife. I think there are elements of, so all trad wives are stay-at-home mums but not all stay-at-home

mums are trad wives if that makes sense. I was wondering could you be a trad wife with no children? So Estee Williams is pregnant now but she was a trad wife with no children. Her kind of, was a trad wife with no children. Her kind of persona is very, is the sort of 1950s Marilyn Monroe type thing of being there for her husband, being that submissive, you know, keeping home while waiting for him to come home from work. So in that sense, yes, you can, but there was, I think there was always that she was on a journey to being a mom. Expectation, shall we say. Yeah. But you know, I was trying to charge her there, but whether it's attainable for everybody, obviously, she's working inside the home in that way, maybe a double job at home,

being a content creator and also carrying out a lot of the household chores. But in some ways, I think it could be seen as the have and have nots. It's, you know, sometimes you have a newspaper supplements that talk about rich and famous or how to spend it and stuff like that. And in a way, perhaps that's what we're peering into. Yes, like whether somebody can afford to be a tradwife, to put it in frank terms.

Absolutely. I think you, you know, you definitely have to have the if you're on a single income family, that income has to be, you know, relatively substantial for that to work. I do think just to complicate that, when you have young children and you're paying for childcare, that is also extremely expensive. So you have to be on a relatively good income

to go back to work as well. So there is that element, but you're right in the sense that most people need two incomes to sort of manage their life. So it is right in the sense that most people need to incomes to manage their lives. So it is privileged in that sense to be able to be a proud wife. Charlie, what do you say to people who think the type of content that you're making sets women back? I actually haven't come across that.

Nobody has said that directly to me. So I haven't been asked it. Maybe I'm asking you now in that sense that when we read about this fascination with women inside the home prioritizing domestic duties, some feel it's generally men that are in that role on social content that is being made. And obviously it sets a certain picture. Yeah, I've just had people saying thank you for giving me permission to be able to stay at home and not feel the pressure to go back to work. So I haven't had it from the other side. Maybe I will now. But I think, you know, as you were just talking, the cost of childcare is so high.

It's about looking at your finances, looking at how you're going to run it, and what works best for you. And I know that I am very, very lucky that I work for myself. And I can, at the drop of a hat, go and pick up a child if they've had an accident at school, or they need me me or something happens. I feel really privileged that I can do that. And I think if you have children, it's very difficult if you're working full time and you can't take the time off

to be there for them. And then, you know, in the holidays, what do you do with them? If you've got a high powered job, you're then having to pay for childcare and school holidays. It's very difficult. So I do feel privileged that I get to be very flexible with my work. Thank you so much for joining us. Leanne, you wanted to add something? Yeah, I just wanted to say that I hate the fact

that some mothers have to feel guilty about going to work because, you know, it shouldn't be that way that they feel that they can't be there for their children because they're going to work. We should be able to share it. Charlie Gray, influencer. Thank you so much for coming on. And we also had Leanne Child. Her novel is The Trad Wife's Secret, inspired by influencers. Here's one. I run a home without the help of another person and I call myself a domestic engineer. Keep them coming 84844 if you'd like to get in touch. A number of developments this morning from Gaza. The UK, France and Canada warned Israel to stop its renewed military offensive in Gaza and to increase the flow of aid. Israel says it has allowed five UN lorries carrying

humanitarian aid, including baby food, into the Gaza Strip after 11 weeks of a blockade. This morning, the UN's Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs told the Today programme that 14,000 babies could die in Gaza in the next 48 hours if more aid doesn't reach them. The UN has previously said there are nearly 71,000 children and more than 17,000 mothers thought to be at risk of acute malnutrition. The Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his

decision to temporarily let in a minimal amount of food followed pressure from allies in the US Senate. Joining me in a moment live from Gaza is the humanitarian director for Save the Children, Rachel Cummings. But first let me get the latest from our diplomatic correspondent, Paul Adams. Paul, good to have you with us. Perhaps you could remind us in detail a little more of what the children, Rachel Cummings. But first let me get the latest from our diplomatic correspondent Paul Adams. Paul, good to have you with us. Perhaps you could remind us in detail a little more of what the UK, France and Canada have said to Israel. Well, it's pretty strong language, Nuala. I mean, almost unprecedented, I would say. They have described the situation in Gaza as intolerable. They say that while Israel had the right to respond to the Hamas attacks of October the 7th, this escalation in their words is wholly disproportionate and that

the response in letting a handful of trucks in yesterday was wholly inadequate. So and they're also warning of what they call further concrete steps if the situation isn't improved Which obviously raises the prospect of some of Israel's closest allies Pondering at least the possibility of some kind of sanctions. What might that look like Paul if it's possible to know? Well, there are a whole range of measures that could be used from Looking again at arms sales something that Britain has already done with the reduction in the number of licenses granted, trade deals.

Israel has a very good trading relationship with a lot of Western nations and the issue of recognition of a Palestinian state, something that France has already indicated it might be prepared to do as early as next month, something MPs have occasionally tried to persuade the government here to do. All of these are measures that governments could take and it does feel as though we are reaching a point at which some of them are really genuinely losing their patience and prepared to do things that they have not been contemplating or ready to do in the past. But how does this line up then, Paul, with what the United States is or isn't doing? I mentioned Benjamin Netanyahu there saying his decision to let in that minimal amount of aid

followed pressure from allies in the US Senate. How does the US stand up then towards UK, France and Canada? Well, they're obviously not on the same page. Donald Trump doesn't seem particularly exercised about the situation in Gaza, although he did say at the tail end of his trip to the Gulf last week that too many people were starving in Gaza. So that caused people to prick up their ears. I think one of the things that happened with the Israeli decision to let aid in

is actually that some of that pressure was coming from within the Israeli military. Benjamin Netanyahu is poised to launch what could be the largest, most devastating military operation in Gaza so far, which may sound extraordinary after everything we've seen in the past year and a half. But people within the military have been saying you cannot do this while the area is teetering on the brink of starvation, which is something that after a year and a half has finally become a reality. We are beginning to see the region, particularly its young people,

children, just teetering on the edge now of something that could turn into a major humanitarian catastrophe with large numbers of people starving. As you talk about though, that potential military offensive by Israel, can you tell us or I suppose really bring us up to speed about why that might be happening now? Like what is the state of play on the ground? Well this all stems from Benjamin Netanyahu's desire as he sees it to finish off Hamas. Hamas have continued to to be a force on the ground. They are a political entity.

Their fighters are still engaging the Israeli military from time to time. I mean, look, they're not at all. They're nothing like the force that launched the devastating assault on Israel on October the 7th in 2023. The idea that Hamas could launch an operation like that again now is frankly for the birds. We've long passed the

point at which Hamas has been defeated in that respect but Mr Netanyahu believes and his hardline right-wing colleagues are backing him up on this that the job has to be finished, that Hamas has to be entirely eradicated from the Gaza Strip. Something that Israel's allies and indeed many people in Israel think is a fanciful, illusory goal, that it simply cannot be achieved. So there is this kind of strange two-track narrative taking place of that potential strike, but at the same time some aid going in. Do we know exactly what it entails? What is going through? What is not going through? Well until yesterday nothing, but

then we saw this decision you just alluded to, to let a handful of trucks in and it really is just a handful. We don't even know, frankly, whether those trucks have reached their destination. They were primarily carrying baby formula because there is an acute problem with large numbers of babies and small children who are very, very malnourished, pregnant and breastfeeding women who are simply incapable of looking after their two week to breastfeed their own children, and hospitals overwhelmed and unable to really address

the issue of this combination of hunger and sickness, which is an insidious, devastating combination, which hospitals have to kind of put to one side while they deal with the more urgent matter of the huge numbers of people who are coming in with blast injuries on a daily basis. So the situation there is dreadful and that's why this baby formula was the first most urgent requirement. But the UN is saying that five trucks is literally nothing. In order to put the civilian population of Gaza back on its feet, we need to see five to 600 trucks going in every day.

Something that the UN and other agencies involved in looking after Gaza managed to do perfectly well for the period of the ceasefire from mid-January to the beginning of March. Now the Israeli government says it wants to replace this entire aid infrastructure, which has existed in Gaza for decades with a new improvised formula run by

American military contractors working alongside the Israeli military. The UN says that is entirely unacceptable. It is a tiny operation which won't reach most of the people who need it and will create all kinds of additional problems. And at the moment we have this problem of whether aid gets in and if it does get in, who administers it?

Paul Adams, thank you so much giving us some of the details to that decision to let in minimal aid. Paul Adams is the BBC's diplomatic correspondent. I want to bring in the humanitarian director for Save the Children Rachel Cummings. Rachel good to have you with us. Tell me a little bit about what you are hearing particularly when it comes to the women and children that you're working with. Thanks very much. Yeah I'm currently in Derrubala in the middle area in Gaza and the situation is absolutely extraordinary. It's dire for children and mothers here. You know just in the last four days a hundred thousand people

across Gaza have been displaced. Yesterday pretty much the whole of Canunas, 300,000 people received displacement orders and of course there is nowhere safe for people to go to in Gaza. People are being pushed and pushed into the west of Gaza but it is very unsafe and extremely overcrowded. Now Save the Children along with partners are doing all that we can of course and the stories that we're hearing from mothers and from children is absolutely desperate. Just a couple of days ago I was in our clinic in Canunas which is very busy and we've only just reopened it having closed it with the resumption of fighting in the last couple of weeks.

So we've reopened it and of course seeing many children and their caregivers. And one of the women shared with me that, you know, her children just cry all the time. They are hungry all the time and she does not have any food, enough food to give them and they're resorting to bulking out food with grass. She was also talking about obtaining animal fodder and crushing it up. People are crushing up food and adding water to try and bulk it out, giving children one meal a day at night to see if they can sleep through because they are hungry all the time and that's just one instance across thousands and hundreds of thousands of people who are desperately struggling to feed their children. So with that there

are some horrific stories that you're talking about Rachel. I'm wondering with this minimal aid as we're hearing getting through does that make any difference to the people that you are serving? It will make some difference to very, very few people. And of course, we welcome the introduction of humanitarian supplies into Gaza. But during the pause between January and March, 600 trucks were entering Gaza. And, the humanitarian secretary is well able to manage those trucks and those supplies and distributions to people in need. Now potentially five or ten trucks that arrived yesterday is obviously a drop in the ocean, it is obviously not enough. A hundred trucks arriving over the course of the next few days again will not be enough. It will have impact on very few people when the whole

population of Gaza, over 2 million people, are currently at risk of famine. Paul Adams is with us, the BBC's diplomatic correspondent. Coming back to some of the challenges that Rachel talks about, the people she's met and the challenges that they are facing, is there any conversation taking place between the United States and UK, France and Canada? I think there's a lot of obvious deep and deepening concern being expressed, but I don't get the impression that between them any of the Israel's sort of Western allies are coming up with any very convincing solution to this because you have this situation in which the Israeli government

seems intent on launching this new operation. We've not heard anything from the United States and frankly that's the only country ultimately that matters here to suggest that Israel should not do that. There are negotiations going on and they have been for several days in Qatar. These are negotiations we've heard about over and over again over the past year and a half involving American Israeli Hamas officials and negotiators to try and bring about a new ceasefire and we hear from time to time new formulas being mentioned in which you know there would be a pause in the fighting for a week or a month and then Hamas would release hostages in certain batches. And let's not forget, there are still 59 Israeli hostages,

alive and dead, being held by Hamas in the tunnels of Gaza. But these negotiations, which occasionally seem to offer a glimmer of hope and the possibility that Benjamin Netanyahu's new offensive might be forestalled, then that hope seems to just fade away again and the signs that we're hearing at the moment do not seem to be good. Ultimately, it is really only Donald Trump

who would be able to tell Benjamin Netanyahu not to do this. And so far, we don't think he has. Our diplomatic correspondent, Paul Adams, also speaking to his humanitarian director for Save the Children, Rachel Cummings. Thanks to you both. The Israeli government was approached for a statement, but has not yet sent a response. There's a story this morning in one of the papers of the mental health nurse, Rachel Luby, discussing her shopping addiction.

This is in the Daily Mail. She said it led to her ordering thousands of pounds worth of presents for staff and patients on her ward and she was receiving parcels every day. Now after 20 years in the grip of that addiction Rachel has finally been diagnosed with bipolar. She feels her shopping addiction was trivialized rather than being seen as a red flag which prolonged her suffering. So how common is it and why is it something that is often trivialized in the media, even the term retail therapy that can be used or the term shopaholic? Here to discuss with me is the financial psychotherapist and

author of Money on Your Mind, The Psychology Behind Your Financial Habits, it's Vicky Raynall. Good to have you with us Vicky, thank you for joining us. What do you think about that story I was just outlining there that was in today's Daily Mail? It's a very sad story to hear, but unfortunately, shopping addiction, while it's a term that is commonly used, is not a term that is in the diagnostic manual that doctors and psychiatrists use to diagnose people, which I think is part of the problem as to why it's not taken seriously the way that other behavioral addictions such as gambling or even gaming addictions that

are in the manual are taken. How is it, you know, because you'll hear people going on shopping sprees. I mean, something at times that is celebrated or considered fun. Where is the line? Hmm. Well, as you say, many people use it to feel better, to address feelings of boredom, of sadness or even loneliness sometimes. And this is because spending often gives us a short lived boost in our mood. But it's not a great strategy

because feelings are short-lived. We haven't addressed the underlying feelings that we were trying to address in the first place. And now on top of it, sometimes we have guilt and regret if we have spent beyond our means. But doing it occasionally, doing it once in a while, doesn't make you a shopping addict. And there are criteria that you can go through that determine whether this is

turning into a problem. Part of the easy, the litmus test is, you know, can you help yourself? Can you stop yourself from shopping? Can you control that impulse? And I think the other question to ask is, is it taking over other priorities in your life? So basically when you're looking to diagnose either a compulsive shopper or somebody with a shopping addiction, what you're looking at is that compulsive need to spend, whether purchasing has become a default response to any negative feeling or event, and whether the focus is on the act rather than what they're buying, sometimes you see a desperation to spend pretty much on anything and

what they spend on almost becomes irrelevant. I was about to ask you that. I mean, is it some product in particular that is more likely to be the impulse? to be the impulse? I would say that in my experience, when the focus is on the product, there might be something else going on rather than a shopping addiction per se. It might be something about the symbolic meaning of that product. So for example, I worked with a woman who had a particular obsession with designer handbags and when we started unpicking what about them, you know, what is this obsession about. We went all the way back to her childhood in which she had been left by one of her parents and that loss had left her

with this fear of abandonment and kind of an emotional gap that she was looking to replace. And handbags, these luxury handbags represented something that stays forever. And so she told me kind of in tears, you know, things stay, they don't leave you. And that was, you see, a very particular obsession with an object rather than I'll buy anything just to address any feeling that I'm feeling right now. And I'm thinking things must have, you know, developed over the past few years in the sense of the explosion of online shopping as opposed to having to take yourself up and go and face somebody and hand over your credit card. You're right. That has created a particular problem for people who might have a tendency

to be impulsive because it has taken away the thinking time. And that's exactly what you might want to try and reintroduce if you're fighting these impulses. So you want to do anything you can to build in some thinking space before you buy, whether that means adding things to your shopping cart online by giving yourself 24 hours before you buy, whether that means adding things to your shopping card online by giving yourself 24 hours before you make the actual purchase or whatever works for you. But I think trying to tap into that part of you that can be more thoughtful and less impulsive is the key. It's sometimes seen more as a woman's issue.

Do you think that's fair? I think statistically women might buy items, so clothes and makeup items, more than men. But I have seen in my consulting room, and I can only speak to that, men struggling with shopping addictions as well. The focus might be on maybe gadgets or even experiences rather than items but I have seen both. What's happening? Are people getting dopamine hits? Like what is actually happening with their mental health in the sense that they go to it or that they're attracted to it? Well, you make a good point because the appealing is not just emotional. This is not just about addressing feelings.

There's also physiological reason why shopping is pleasurable. And studies have shown that shopping stimulates the pleasure center in the brain. And it's not the buying per se, but actually what happens before we buy. So the process of looking around and finding something that we like, or finding a bargain, or even just imagining how the item we're about to purchase will improve our lives. Any of those things can trigger a release of dopamine in the brain. And this is the chemical response that we can call the shopper's high. That's the term usually used. But dopamine release is also linked to addictive behavior

because it conditions our body to seek more of that experience in the future. And that's the bit that can become tricky. If we go back for more and more, and there's our physiological pull to go back for more and more, that's when it can become a slippery slope into a compulsion and then an addiction. So I suppose just in my last 30 seconds you said Vicky, what people need to unpick in those scenarios is those feelings before actually making the purchase. Try to spot patterns, you know, what are you feeling on that Sunday afternoon when you're going online and scrolling endlessly? What has led you, what feeling emotion has led you to seek

out that experience. Thank you so much for joining us. That's Vicky Raynall, financial psychotherapist and author. If you have been impacted by this discussion or feel like you might need help, you can find links on the BBC Action Line website. I do want to let you know on tomorrow's programme, we'll be marking the fifth anniversary of the death of George Floyd. Heartbreaking documentary all about the backlash to his death as well. Also I will be talking to Reform UK's first female MP, that is Sarah Pochin. Thanks for all your messages coming in on Trout Wives.

No one has mentioned the impact it may have been a tradwife on a woman's future pension income. I think this is without content creating. It may save money now but could leave the woman without a work related pension in future years. Please mention this as women need to ensure they're in a good financial position. Also others say it's a privilege to survive on one wage but many only have one person in the household. Please acknowledge it. Thanks for listening. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Join us again next time. From BBC Radio 4 and the History Podcast.

We're not so funny people in our family. I'm Joe Dunthorn. Funny people. And this is Half Life. She finished her job, she dropped dead. My father finished his job, he was dead within a week. I mean that's all quite a weird kind of story, you know. And so we call it like the curse of this memoir.

An eight part podcast about how the past lives on inside us. I wonder how you feel after all of this. Even when we try to ignore it. All of the bombs will detonate sooner or later. Listen to Half Life on BBC Sounds.