Woman's Hour - Carrie Johnson, Supreme Court nominee, Women & work in the 17th century, Rising popularity of thongs, MMR

Episode Date: February 1, 2022

As the Prime Minister apologises for a failure of leadership, accepting Sue Gray's report, and promises to overhaul Number 10 - his place of work and home - what of Carrie Johnson? And concerns about the blurring of lines...The pandemic has changed the way some women work and has blurred the boundaries between home and work for many. A new book by Professor Laura Gowing of King’s College London called 'Ingenious Trade' unearths the stories of women at work in 17th Century London and shows how crucial to their identity paid employment was. For those who remember the late 90s and early noughties, thongs were a defining emblem of popular fashion, often poking out of denim and low-rise trousers. Today, clothes retailers are seeing a surge in their thong sales since 2019, and with the resurgence of ‘y2k’ style among young people, it seems that thongs are back.Joe Biden announced last week that he'd fulfil his campaign promise of the first black female justice just as Justice Stephen Breyer said he would retire. Biden said that it was long overdue in his opinion and that he will reveal his choice of a younger, liberal judge by the end of February. While many Americans welcome diversity in the Supreme Court, Biden has also faced criticism for playing identity politics. Emma discusses this with Kimberly Peeler-Allen who is the co-founder of Higher Heights, an organisation that builds the collective political power of Black women and Lawrence Hurley, Reuters U.S. Supreme Court Correspondent.Latest data from the UK Health Security Agency shows that more than one in ten children starting school in England are at risk of measles because they haven't had their jabs. Vaccine rates for the MMR, which helps protect five-year-olds against measles, mumps and rubella, have fallen to their lowest level in a decade. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, there's been a concerning drop in the number of children receiving these vaccinations on time, with some parents perhaps not wanting to burden the NHS or unaware doctors were still offering appointments. Presenter: Emma Barnett Producer: Kirsty StarkeyInterviewed Guest: Caroline Slocock Interviewed Guest: Caroline Wheeler Interviewed Guest: Professor Laura Gowing Interviewed Guest: Alizé Demange Interviewed Guest: Letty Cole Interviewed Guest: Kimberly Peeler-Allen Interviewed Guest: Lawrence Hurley Interviewed Guest: Professor Helen Bedford

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2, and of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme, peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Hello, I'm Emma Barnett and welcome to Woman's Hour from BBC Radio 4. Good morning and welcome to the programme. From thongs to the US Supreme Court, I've got you covered today. Or not, in the case of thongs. But what I am intrigued to hear your take on is how much work is your identity and the blurring of lines between work and life, wittingly or unwittingly. On today's programme, we're going to learn together about how much work formed a part of women's identity fight for the right to work, to be paid properly and

treated well, if not equally, to actually leave the home and have a separate identity. Some of you will have jobs which are just that. They do not define who you are and you make all efforts to ensure that. They just are a way of paying the bills. Some of you won't be working and are looking and needing. I'm very mindful of that. Some of you may be at the start of your working life or at the end. But those boundaries between work and life have blurred in the digital age. And of course, during the pandemic, as people have begun working where they live or carried on, but with more intensity, it is a blur. How much of you is you and how much of that is bound up in work? Perhaps you're happy with that or have you tried to make a change? Perhaps very recently.

You can text me here at Women's Hour on 84844. Text will be charged to your standard message rate. On social media, we're at BBC Women's Hour or email me your take through our website. But our first discussion goes to the heart of blurred boundaries between work and life. Because one of the 12 parties being investigated by the Metropolitan Police after the publication of the civil servant Sue Gray's abbreviated report yesterday

into those Downing Street parties during lockdown is alleged to have happened in the Prime Minister's private apartment. Another concerns a birthday gathering for Boris Johnson. One woman said to be at the heart of both of those gatherings and is the one to live above the shop and to formally work for the Conservative Party is one Carrie Johnson to the Prime Minister's actions is sexist and if some of the descriptions of her by those formerly in the Prime Minister's circle are misogynistic. There is a fact that remains. Carrie Johnson is the first Prime Ministerial spouse who has had a career in politics and because of that she has been described as the most powerful political spouse in living memory in this country.

Now her actions during lockdown are under the spotlight with the Prime Minister. And as the Prime Minister apologises for a failure of leadership, accepting Sue Gray's report, and those are her words, and promises to overhaul number 10, his place of work and home. What of Carrie Johnson and those concerns about the blurring of lines? Well, to help us navigate, Caroline Slocock, Director of Civil Exchange and a former Number 10 private secretary to two prime ministers, and Caroline Wheeler, the political editor for The Sunday Times. And I should say at this point, we did invite Carrie Johnson

on to Women's Hour this morning, or to provide a comment, but she isn't making a comment while the matter is being examined by the police. Caroline Wheeler, good morning. Good morning. Your colleague over on The Times, The Daily Times, Rachel Sylvester, has written an article about this issue, about Carrie Johnson, the headline, The Most Powerful Spouse in Living Memory. What do you say to those who immediately think why on earth is woman's hour discussing the wife well i can understand and i think there is a kind of natural tension here because there have been many claims made against carrie johnson and very uh unfair uh sort of names against her being princess nut nut and all sorts of other horrible

sort of pejorative titles but at the same time I think it is important that we get to the heart of this particular issue, because there is, as you said in your introduction, a real blurring here between the work and the personal in this particular case. And I think the party that you allude to, which is this one which took place on the 13th of November in the prime minister's flat, it speaks really to the heart of the tensions that exist there in the relationship both between the Prime Minister and his wife, but also the relationship between work and play in that particular environment. And so that's why Carrie Johnson has been brought into this particular fray at this time. And it's, as we say, not the first time that this has happened where there has been a kind of blurring of boundaries between the two in other issues. If we think about Wallpaper Gate, for example, the other scrapes that they've got into, including the holiday to Mustique and other events.

And it is difficult, I think, for Carrie Johnson to navigate her way through the political minefield, given that she has been a very political personality herself and indeed already does a job involving sort of animal rights campaigning, which naturally takes her into that domain as well, which means that it's, you know, it leaves her open, I suppose, to accusation that she does have unfair influence over the prime minister. And so that's why she herself finds herself under the spotlight at the moment. And there are some saying that there hasn't been perhaps enough scrutiny there because of that

political influence and political role that goes beyond the spouse because of her experience, because of allegations of sexism, that it isn't something to go anywhere near. Do you think that it is right to have some level of scrutiny of her role beyond what might normally be said with regards to how your spouse influences you? Yes, I think in this particular issue, if we're particularly talking about party gate,

I mean, I think some of the allegations may be a little difficult to unpick, given the setup that exists in Downing Street, which is that there is a a place of living for the Prime Minister and his wife and indeed the Chancellor and his family and a place of work which are very much intertwined and so I think even if you think about what Sue Gray said about the parties in the garden she said actually it was a sensible solution to extend the workplace into the garden during the time of the pandemic to give more ventilation for those work dues even though I think there have been some eyebrows raised about work dues involving cheese and wine for example doesn't normally happen in our work meetings I can tell

you but at the same time there were also parties which took place in the flat above number 10 Downing Street and of course I understand and we indeed looked at this party that if you look, and I think it will come out in due time and I won't name those names now, but if you look at the people that I understand were attending that particular party, they were very much in the Prime Minister's wife's inner circle as opposed to his. So you know who went to this party? Have journalists seen lists of names? We have been told and we have been given names, people which I have put to number 10 and they have not been refuted. But we have been asked to be cautious about what we publish at this time, given the fact that there is a police investigation ongoing. Because it was said, if I may just interrupt, I'm going off journalists' work here, but it has been said that that particular party was celebrating Dominic Cummings' exit from Number 10.

And therefore it was a political gathering in that sense. And that sort of celebration without naming names, because I recognise you're not going to do that. Would that match what you have also seen and heard? No. I've been told very interesting witness accounts of the party of loud music playing. There seemed to have been ABBA music playing. I think one journalist, and indeed I think we may have also reported it, that the song Winner Takes It All was playing, a song which was seen to be quite pointed given the tensions that had existed between the Prime Minister's wife and Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister's most senior aide. But I think it is worth, given that you've raised that, also raising the fact that it's not just a gender thing here. There was a real issue around power at that particular time and a power struggle that was going on within Downing Street between both the Prime Minister and his most senior aide.

And certainly people at the time were saying that there was a sense that Dominic Cummings had garnered too much power and was beginning to really call the shots, making the Prime Minister feel rather uncomfortable in that, you know, he is the elected representative there to make these decisions. So it's not just about, you know, Carrie versus Dominic Cummings or Dominic Cummings in the Prime Minister. It was a real power struggle right at the heart of Downing Street. A couple of messages in. Carrie Johnson is not a civilian. She's a politician, just not elected.

She's certainly open to justifiable criticism. Ruth, though, got in touch to say, Carrie Johnson is of no interest to feminism or relevant to women's lives in general. She has never been elected to anything. Why on earth is she a lead item on Woman's Hour? Let me bring in Caroline Slowcock, Director of Civil Exchange,

and as I said, former Number 10 Private Secretary to two Prime Ministers. Good morning, Caroline. Morning. What do you want to say about this particular element, the blurring of the lines within Number 10 and how that has particularly played out with reference to this event that we know, this gathering is being investigated by the police that took place in the Prime Minister's private apartment?

Well, I think what we do know is that Carrie Johnson is very influential on her husband. And you've just got to look at that photograph of the gathering in the garden where she's sitting with the Prime Minister and Dominic Cummings and his Principal Private Secretary. And it was said, the defence was, that that was a work meeting. I think she's right at the heart of some of the decisions that are being made at number 10. And I think this is really central at the moment because the Prime Minister is saying, in response to the Zubairi report, look, I'm going to change number 10. I'm going to change the staff, I'm going

to bring in this permanent secretary, and that's going to deal with all of these problems that you, you know, are described in the Sue Gray report. But he's not able to change his wife, you know, she's not accountable in any sense, in any form, in this situation. She's not appointed, and she's not going to go. So I think we do need to look at the character of Carrie Johnson alongside the character of her husband and consider the question, are things in Number 10

really going to change? You know, if we just sort of move a few people around. And having been within Number 10, having worked within Number 10, you know, I'm reminded some of the defence of Boris Johnson and that whole operation has been, well, number 10 has been a bloated, ill-run organisation for

years. Successive prime ministers have struggled with this. This is what Paul Scully, one of the ministers for the government, said last night to me on Newsnight, that this is something that's been like this for a long time. Or does change with each administration well i mean uh there's no other administration that's got itself into this kind of scandal and number 10 has been um enlarged since the day when i worked number 10 which was under thatcher and major uh it's been large for a long time but but there's been no scandal like this what you need to do is look at who sets the culture. Ultimately, that comes from the top. I know from my own time at Number 10, you know, when I was working for Thatcher,

you know, there was a particular culture, you know, incredibly hardworking, very kind of loyal environment. You know, it's the person at the top who sets the culture. And I think in this case, we may well be looking at a situation where it's not just the prime minister, but it's also the prime minister's wife who's setting the culture. And I say that simply because one of these key parties was taking place in number 10. And there she was with the designer, Lulu Little, carrying the cake into the cabinet room on one of the other events which are being investigated by the police. Although some would argue on that it was a short gathering around a cake.

They were all at work together. It was the prime minister's birthday. That's what has been said, I suppose. You don't take your designer in normally in those situations. Somebody who's working up in the flat, in fact, physically in number 11, who would not normally be meeting any of those people at that particular moment. You know, COVID could have passed, you know, from her or vice versa. And that's what all the COVID regulations were about. When you, in terms of what you've just said there about the spouse and having an influence, though, you, of course, will have been, I'm sure, you know, seeing when you're working for Margaret

Thatcher, seeing Dennis Thatcher, when you're working with John Major, Norma Major. I mean, the influence, you don't know what that influence is. What do you think the difference is here? Well, you know, the difference is that their spouses either had a full time job. Most of them had a full time job or they they held back. You know, Thatcher, at the point when she was thinking about resigning, when she came back from Paris, the first thing she did was go and talk to Dennis, obviously, because this is about a joint decision for them about her life course. But none of them were consulting their spouse about the day-to-day business of government. None of them were taking them into meetings about

government affairs. Well, I mean, there could have been. A lot was said, of course, about Theresa May and Philip May. Philip May, of course, having a strong political interest, part of the Conservative Party himself, that they would consult. But you're saying the difference is away from actually doing it in your home as you do with your spouse when you discuss your job. Not bringing them into the Cabinet Room, not bringing them into what appears, by the defence, appears to be was a work meeting in the Garden.

You know, she is closely involved and, you know, she's not accountable. She's not appointed. Yesterday, Boris Johnson said he was going to change the codes of conduct for civil servants and special advisers. Is he going to change the code of conduct for his wife? Do you feel strongly that that matters? Yes, I think it does. If she's actually working in Number 10, and, you know, they said she was working when she was sitting there in the garden with other people. I'm not sure

they specifically said she was working, but they said it was a work event, you are correct in that respect. The difference between her being there, I think, is that she is at the heart of government. And she's, you know, if she's going to take this kind of role, and, you know, there's nothing to stop her, then she needs to be accountable. And, you know, prime ministers are frequently sacked or lost key advisers in some of these big disputes.

You know, Fiona Hill, Nick Timothy, they were sacked by Theresa May because people demanded it. But Carrie Johnson isn't going anywhere. So where is the accountability in this situation? Just to be clear, of course, you're not blaming her for this in the sense of the overall affair. This is a lens, of course, with which to view what has been going on and what hasn't been said, perhaps, because Siobhan has messaged in saying, let's that's it. Blame the woman. Johnson is prime minister and he and he alone is responsible for everything that happens at number 10. Caroline Wheeler. I certainly agree with that. I agree that he, ultimately the buck stops with him.

Yes. And I just wanted to make, I suppose, make that clear within this conversation, because we have spoken before, as have you and I, Caroline Wheeler, to bring you back in on this, about this overhaul of number 10 and what's going to happen next. How do you see this playing out? There was something yesterday. Correct me if I'm wrong about how long this could take for the Metropolitan Police to come to some conclusions. Yeah, exactly. I mean, it was interesting how last week played out. It was very much as we went back to work. We have Mondays off, having worked Sundays, that we thought that the Sue Gray report was going to

be delayed possibly months, even years. If you think back to that cash for honours investigation that took place under the Blair administration, we were left waiting for 18 months for the end of that particular investigation to happen. It does feel like we're going to enter a sort of period of paralysis from now on until that happens, given that we haven't seen the full sort of findings of the report yet and have only seen this kind of summary of evidence that she's got.

And I think that does put the prime minister in quite a difficult position. Although I note when I listened to his statement yesterday, he did actually say he was going to be making some announcement in the coming days about how he intended

to change his top team. And I think he mentioned some of that when he addressed the 1922 committee yesterday, talking about new boards, for example, policy boards, etc., etc. But it is really that personnel change that we're expecting at the top. Because I've been writing about for months now. Well, I was going to say it's noted almost every time we sort of talk about this. There'll be some of our listeners hoping that we never talk about it again.

And there'll be others hoping that there is more and more and more scrutiny. And I think what's notable when we have spoken about this is that Allegra Stratton is the only person to have resigned, the former spokesperson for the Prime Minister and an advisor. And it's noted, you know, the only person who resigned is a woman and a woman who wasn't seemingly at any of these parties. So do you think those changes will mean changes in terms of people losing their jobs? I think that's certainly what's been mooted when we've talked to people behind the scenes. There's definitely been a suggestion that there would be people who would be moving away from their positions, whether that means that they get fired, whether that means that

they get moved to different roles. That's certainly been on the cards. And I think it's going to be very difficult if we see a smattering of senior people with inside number 10, possibly even the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's wife himself, with fines. Is it your understanding that both the Prime Minister and his wife could be questioned by the police? Well, I think that will be an interesting negotiation that we see them tap dance around that. As we know, in the Cash for Honours investigation,

the Prime Minister at the time, Tony Blair, was only ever interviewed as a witness rather than as a suspect and indeed was not interviewed under caution. So I think we'll have to wait to see how the Metropolitan Police navigate their way around that. I'm just trying to think... Because it's been very political. The reason I around that. I'm just trying to think it's been very political. The reason I also ask is I'm just trying to think if you or I hosted a party during lockdown and we were reported by our neighbours or whoever,

we would expect as the hosts of that to be questioned by the police at the height of those those rules. So how you negotiate that is a question. I think it will come down to, I've been thinking about this a lot, about who you describe as the hoster of that particular party. I mean, given that it was in the Prime Minister's house, given that it was in the Prime Minister's residence in the garden, you know, does he de facto become the person who hosted that? Or do we look at, for example, Martin Reynolds, the Principal Private Secretary who sent out that particular no no i was i was thinking about the one in the apartment actually yeah the one in the apartment's a tricky one and i think i mean we've all been saying within the media for some time

that that was the one that we thought was going to create the greatest deal of difficulty for sue grey because the argument that will be made is that it was a work event uh that people came into that flat to discuss uh work. Difficult given that some of the special advisors that I understand attended were not special advisors within number 10, but were from other departments for them to explain that. But I think that's where you're going to see the real debate here is about who hosted the parties. But of course, you're absolutely right, if you or I had hosted a party in our house, we would have been held responsible. We would be expecting to get that preliminary fine.

And of course, don't forget that there's a fine for one breach. The fines increase according to the number of breaches there have been. And my understanding is that in the most serious of cases where there were 30 people or more, which affects some of those events in the garden. Of course, the highest level of fine is actually £10,000, which is an extraordinary amount of money. Well, you seem to know a lot about names and what's gone on. And somebody to keep reading, of course, Caroline Wheeler, Sunday Times political editor. We'll see what emerges and how this plays out. Caroline Slowcock, Director of Civil Exchange and a former Number 10 private secretary, of course, worked within number 10 and seen how it works firsthand. Thank you to both of you. Now, a lot of messages coming in about your identity and work and those lines and those boundaries.

A few also coming in off the back of that conversation. One from Twitter, Miss Varney says, is it not possible to blame both Boris and Carrie Johnson? She is overstepping her mark and he should have stopped her. It smacks of Lord and Lady Macbeth here, both equally responsible for this shambles. It was said by reporters last night when Boris Johnson was talking to MPs, Conservative MPs, to get them on side. He did use a Shakespearean reference comparing himself to Othello.

Seeing the good in everyone. Sheila says, I find it perfectly acceptable to discuss the topic of Carrie Johnson. She's chosen to influence the culture of 10 Downing Street. It was not publicly apparent that Norma Major, Philip May, influenced their spouses. She has chosen a different path. Well, women and work, how it's valued or not. The pandemic, of course, has changed some of the ways that women work.

All of us work and has blurred those boundaries and sparked reflection on how much of your identity perhaps is bound up with your job. A new book by Professor Laura Gowing of King's College London is called Ingenious Trade and it unearths the stories of women's work in 17th century London and offers insights about how crucial to their identity paid employment was. Laura, good morning. Morning. How did women see work? What sort of thing were they doing and how much value did they place on it? We're seeing a real change in the 17th century as work and home get more separated. And that has implications for women, especially in London and in other urban areas. I think we could see it as a route to independence. One of the things that's happening

is a great explosion in fashion and shops. Shops are becoming really important and women of course are not just going into shops and shopping but they're working behind the counter in shops and running shops of their own. And women are getting trained from quite a young age, sort of age 14 onwards, as apprentices in the trade of seamstresses, some of them being taught to run shops of their own, and other women are actually training them. So much of this is separate from the home, but we can really see it becoming part of people's identities, part of a sense of who a woman is as she gets trained through her adolescence in how to run a shop how to how to use a needle how to negotiate with people well yes and I know I thought also how you got into work and how you were trained was was very

interesting in your book you talk about apprenticeships for girls was a potentially radical business why was that and perhaps could you tell us a bit more about the apprenticeship system then? The thing that made me first think that it was radical was actually looking at the documentation of it. When you're made an apprentice in the 17th century, and until really recently, you have this document of indenture when your name is written on it.

And when I started looking at this pile of documents, I could see that these printed, pre-printed forms have women's names written on them but in order to put a woman on this form which is printed for a man you have to cross out somebody crosses out the he and puts a she so all the way through these pre-printed forms they've rubbed out he and written she into it and that in itself seems like quite a radical thing to do and then pretty soon the companies who apprentice women start to get forms that are specially printed with she on them to have that. They really institute the sort of formality of women's work. So one of the radical things, weirdly, is the formality of it. The fact that it's expected. It's not extraordinary. It's expected.

But women will be trained through these formal contracts to earn a living, whether or not they get married at the end of it. Yes, and marriage. I mean, of course, that defined for some of them whether they would work again or continue working. It's supposed to. But although England in the 17th century is a world in which married women's rights and property rights are very constrained, increasingly we see there's a lot of ways around it. And married women can be treated as a single woman

in order to do trade and run businesses on her own. So although technically you're sort of covered by the legal identity of your husband, actually you do have a separate identity and you can take out debts and do business in your own name. And that's really significant for what it means to be a married woman. What was it giving to the women? Because now I think it's interesting, we do see people talking about

wanting to have boundaries because the boundaries are completely blurred in so many different ways, whether that's you always checking your email late at night or feeling you've got to respond if that is your type of work, you know, through to, of course, where we have been working, if you've been doing it more at home because of the pandemic. Was it something that, you know, it kind of transformed their lives to have these networks away from home? I think it's a really helpful thing to bring out is this idea of working not in the home. This is the point in the late 17th century in London, in particularly when houses and works are getting more, houses and workplaces are getting more separate.

So that work and personal boundary is being established. And women are there in the middle of it. On the one hand, you've got these ideologies about women ought to be at home and women's places in the home, and it's a private world. And on the other hand, you have women out there in these new shopping galleries that are being built in places like the home and it's a private world not that on the other hand you have women out there in the these new shopping galleries that are being built in places like the royal exchange

hundreds of tiny tiny shops with women working and they're working outside the house all day long and the apprentices who they train are also doing to doing that so it also gives them a sense i think of being enmeshed in a business world in l In London the world of stocks and shares and coffee houses and newspapers are very mixed up with the world of buying fashionable goods in these shops. Tell us about Eve Salmon. Eve Salmon is a lovely story. Lots of my work has been on fairly well-to-do women being trained into business work. Eve Salmon is a young girl who's apprenticed to housewifery. She's much poorer in Hackney. And in 1686, she puts in a petition to the court saying that she wants to be released from her apprenticeship because her employers aren't properly training her. And they accuse her of frequenting debauched houses, having syphilis.

And she says they force her to it because they didn't give her enough food and clothes. So it's not just for money that you're learning how to earn, it's that you have to be given food and clothes in order to be able to work in these kind of businesses. But what she says, which is really nice, is let me out of my apprenticeship. I can provide for myself without being a charge to any person.

So there's this sense of this young teenager in suburban London thinking that she can provide for herself and going out into the rest of her life with a sense that she can do that. Were women working because they had to, because they wanted to? Or what could you say about that? Isn't it hard to disentangle all those things? I think it's really important to actually normalise it, but they aren't really thinking, do I want to work? Work is an important part

of women's lives. When historians look at how women actually spend their time putting together pieces of evidence, we can see that they're spending just as much time doing work as men. Just what they're doing is not always very well recorded. But it absolutely is important to think about the productive side of it too and how much money that brings into the family economy and how it contributes to the urban economy and the national economy as well. Let me just share this message that came in bringing us up to the present day from one of our listeners. He said

my work as a nurse was my identity for years. My career progression in the workplace gave me a confidence I didn't possess in the outside world. Now after a few years of retirement, excuse me now a few years off retirement, I'm looking forward to losing the level of seniority I currently carry carry my confidence away from work has grown and my identity is more

rooted in my family than my work age and experience brings wisdom and acceptance and i think this has reduced my need for a work identity i just think that's a fascinating message because you're hearing from someone who's done you know done great things obviously within their working life that's given them more than their outside life gave them in terms of confidence and now they're trying to wean themselves off where they get their confidence and their their power from isn't that so fascinating to have a sense of how work operates over a whole person's life cycle and i think we we haven't looked enough at that historically to get a sense of how women's life cycles involved work being woven in and out of different times of it. So I have one woman who takes on an apprentice to train as a seamstress when she's already pregnant. She clearly doesn't think that she's not going to train the apprentice.

She thinks that perhaps the apprentice will be able to hold the baby for a bit while she's doing her work. And then years and years later, women who've taken apprentices leave money for their own grandchildren to be put into apprenticeships. So it's a sort of ongoing generational story. Well, thank you very much for taking us into some of those stories. Has it made you think differently about your work? Has it given you a different perspective as a professor? It really has actually. And that was partly to do with lockdown as well. I think we all, both of us working at home from lockdown with kids, had a real sense of how difficult it was to have a workplace being in the home. And the joy of getting back into my office with my colleagues, I can't describe. Well, of course, you also get a nice title with your job as well, Professor Laura. You know,

that's also a nice thing, I imagine, to have. I was always very struck when I went into the prime minister's office to interview Theresa May. And she had on the desk, and I'm sure it's still there, UK prime minister, you know, in case it was forgotten. Good to have you signed there. Professor Laura Gowing of King's College London. The book's called Ingenious Trade, looking at the stories of women's work in 17th century London. How about you? How much of your identity is perhaps bound up in work or not? As a first time mother in my 40s, I'm about to return to work, reads this message from Sarah in Cornwall.

Good morning. Following a year of working from home and a year of maternity leave. I'm shocked to feel so differently about my 25 year career as I navigate both roles. Work has been who I am and what I've been most proud of, and that has just evaporated into my love for my child. As a feminist, I'm confused and lost. Our generation is brought up to believe we can have it all. I just can't see now how that is true. Sarah, thank you so much for that message. I also remember thinking on maternity leave how nice it was when you met people and certainly holding the baby. know you didn't get asked what you did or what you do for a living it was actually just about is there a toilet where are we going where can I get a drink some of some of the basics of

life were returned to and I found that particularly refreshing but I think that's a confusion Sarah that many of us have gone through or many of us have thought about before and perhaps a discussion to which we will return but now I've really got to get to thongs because for those of us have gone through or many of us have thought about before and perhaps a discussion to which we will return. But now I've really got to get to thongs because for those of us who remember the late 90s, the early noughties, thongs were a defining emblem of popular fashion, often poking out of denim and low-rise trousers. Today, retailers are seeing a surge in thong sales since 2019 with the resurgence of Y2K style among young people. It seems thongs are back, maybe also with older people, but that's what the data is showing. M&S reports that sales of thongs have risen,

accounting for 14% of their total knicker sales. A browse on Instagram, Depop, ASOS, shows that underwear as outerwear is in fashion. Some designers even designing clothes to have a sewn-in exposed thong as part of the design. The hashtag WhaleTale has 51 million views on TikTok, with lots of women and some men incorporating them as part of their outfits. Over the first lockdown, I should note, a lot of us opted for more comfortable pants and as we looked also for bigger knickers and loungewear. That's what the data showed on

that, seeing a 6% fall in thong sales, for instance, at John Lewis. But society reopening, it's changing again. I'm joined now by the stylist and creative consultant, Alize Dimong, and culture writer, Letty Cole. Alize, first to you, have you noticed this increase? I mean, maybe not directly with your eyes, but tell us what you've seen about this. I don't think I've noticed it directly with my eyes. I feel like because it's such a club to me it reminds me of like a club trend and so as we were locked inside for quite a long time I haven't been able to actually physically see it in the club's kind of sense but um we have I have

personally noticed it a lot in the sense of like how it's been extended to a silhouette style rather than I guess the traditional thongs or how it has been created into a trouser style or a dress style with the, like, well-tailed look or maybe just, like, a hip-exposed kind of, like, cut-out silhouette in dresses and skirts, etc., which I've really enjoyed personally. I don't really have the muffin... Well, I was going to say muffin tops for it. I can't really wear the car style myself.

But I like it on other people and I like I'd like to style it on other people too so sorry are you talking about the shape of of clothes being influenced by yeah as opposed to the wearing as well exactly so I like that kind of cut out silhouette that has kind of like transitioned to that rather than I guess in the Y2K um original style of it or the original rising trend that it was more like you pulled up your thong from your low rise jean and I kind of guess that's kind of like evolved into more like a silhouette in the 2020s so I'll go over it. I mean there is a real divide to bring you in at this point Leti between you know those women who enjoy wearing thongs and those who do not and the minute

I mentioned the word thong we got a text or a tweet here from Nicole who says I've got strong feelings I loathe thongs they do not feel like I'm wearing nothing they feel awful I also dislike how they look on everyone for a feeling of nothingness they are super thin super light and even sheer panties which I much prefer where are you Letty on this I'm all about anything that makes you feel good i mean i understand that so many people love songs they're comfortable they feel great in them but i am so not on that side of the camp i think i started to wear songs when i was still in school to kind of like i don't know feel a bit grown up and like try and impress the boys and I would wear like really definitely too small for me like lacy thong and they were so so uncomfortable

and it got to a point where I was like I've just had enough I need to just start prioritizing comfort um so I haven't really looked back since to be honest I mean life is a decent size cotton gusset isn't it that's what life's all about just just all of that that's what I would say if I was going to have my t-shirt slogan with something but but you know some women you're right they do say it's incredibly comfortable and I never understand the sort of you've got something up the middle of your butt cheeks I mean maybe I'm just my impartiality training here at the BBC we don't have much balance going on you don't like them either but what what is it for you I think I think for me

it's that kind of um it's all my fault because I would wear like really kind of lacy like tight versions but I think the people that wear kind of comfortable versions of the song are wearing you know really nice streamlined stretchy probably lovely ones that M&S do um and i think maybe i need to get away from the kind of just just as granny pants can be sexy they don't need to be like big and billowing and like baggy i guess songs maybe don't have to be like super uncomfortable you can get kind of more um like leisure wear type songs more simple ones at least with your styling work are you are you seeing that being the trend that now it's moving away from i have to use it yeah definitely um i guess when you're moving towards like where clothes are becoming tight are more bodycon you don't want a visible

nickel line so to speak so and also i've been i've been wearing thongs since a young girl, but I think the key is always getting your correct size or bigger. Oh, really? Like, please, yeah, just get a bigger size. That's very long. Wait, so hang on. When you say bigger size, you mean so it sits on you better? Yeah, size up. Because you don't want to get a wedgie, like, when you're sitting down.

But hang on, isn't a thong a wedgie? A thong is a wedgie in a knicker. It shouldn't be like so far up that it's like uncomfortable and painful. Like we're not here to, we can't come and die. Like guys, please, comfort above everything. Do you know what I mean? But definitely. Go on, go on.

No, no, go on. From a client point of view, I guess some of the worst ideas is a visible panty line. So you are looking for underwear that kind of like masks that. So seam free, thongs, maybe sometimes commando, whatever, however, just to make sure that you're getting the right look. There's a message that comes has come in here saying, I can't be the only woman old enough to remember sanitary belts and the fear of them showing. Well, that's what these look like. And for those who want to show this off at the moment and and there's a couple of other messages along those lines elisa do you think though that in terms of why women what is a

sanitary belt or where you could where you would have your your sanitary gear attached to a belt to keep it in place you can go and look it up afterwards it'll be a fun a fun experience i'll probably not define that as well as i could but But it was part of the gear of women's lives and we're in a better place for that. But are you seeing that people are wearing these now more for themselves as opposed to for the gays or for the sexual side? For the male or for the sexual gays? I think there's always a combination of both, I think I think that's there's always a combination of both I think I feel like firstly we're in a place where everything is for yourself like primarily I feel like every decision you make should be for you and how that makes you feel and how comfortable that makes you but then I guess

as human beings we do have an element where we are looking like maybe we do want a little bit of attention sometimes but then I don't think that should be the reason why you wear a thong unless that is I don't know in the privacy of your own home and that's what you like to do. Letty a message let me bring let me bring Letty back in at this point Kate says I'm a 61 year old woman I've been wearing thongs since the early 90s I find them super comfortable I can't bear wearing normal knickers as it makes my bum cheeks too hot hot bum cheeks I don't think I've ever I can't say I've ever experienced that one well I also I also love this one uh which says as a fitness instructor I didn't know thongs had gone away and I used to wear them on the outside

happy times oh yeah I quite like that all power to them i think just it's whatever makes you feel good isn't it at the end of the day um i you know it's actually making me think maybe i should try and experiment with songs again feel like everyone's getting a bit fristier after the pandemic yeah wants to get back out there get everything else out there um well listen it's been a joy because of course to talk about this is the stuff of life. Elise de Monge, thank you very much. Stylist and creative consultant. You've got some homework now with sanitary belts.

Have some fun. And the culture writer, Letty Cole there. A message here from Sybil. Sometimes I just need you more than ever to put things in words. No, just no. Thongs makes your bottom look like a hanging basket. So uncomfortable. Just kind of let that hang as you said it.

Thank you very much indeed. And I'm sure that will not be the last message I receive on this. But I did say from thongs to the Supreme Court, we have you covered. President Biden announced last week he would fulfil his campaign promise of the first black female justice, just as Justice Stephen Breyer has said he would retire. Biden said that it was long overdue in his opinion. Kimberly Peeler-Allen is with us this morning from New York, co-founder of Higher Heights, an organisation that builds the collective political power of black women. We also have Reuters US Supreme Court correspondent Lawrence Hurley from Washington, DC. A warm welcome to you

both. Kimberly Peeler-Allen, what would this mean to you? Oh, it's just similar to when Vice President Kamala Harris was sworn in. It is a moment of pride. It would be a moment of just aspiration and hope for the future. And just a moment where we, you know, all of our foremothers from Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman and Shirley Chisholm and all of the rest, that all of their sacrifices have come to bear in this moment to have a Black woman on our nation's highest court, a place where there have only been two African-Americans ever to serve on the court and to have a black woman be the third would just be a tremendous moment in our nation's history. And to hold that thought, Lawrence, if I bring you in at this point, in terms of what has gone before, just to mention there about the past, but this would be a moment, wouldn't it?

Yeah, I mean, there's been like 115 Supreme Court justices in history. And of those, five have been women at this point. And as was mentioned, two of them have been black. So there's a huge moment for greater representation on the court, which for such a long time, you know, it was very much restricted to white men. And the court even, you know, in the last few years was still dominated by white men until very recently. So, you know, it's a big change for the visibility of the court, which is now looking a bit more like America does. And Kimberly, for us here in the UK, of course, it's very different with what goes on with these particular positions. The fact you have it, you can have it the whole of your life, the whole rest of your life, should you wish. Do you think it will actually make a difference to black women on the ground if there was a black woman to take this post?

Well, I think, you know, the court, particularly in its current configuration, adding a black woman to the court right now will not necessarily change the dynamics or the decisions that come. But I think it, you know, as the adage says, if you see it, you can be it. And President Biden, in addition to naming a Black woman to the Supreme Court, he is also committed to increasing the number of Black women on the federal bench, which is a direct pipeline to the court. So I think it really opens up an opportunity for more Black women, more Black girls to decide that they want to go into law because they want to be similar to the inspiration that Thurgood Marshall provided for so many African Americans to go into law. The possibility of them actually becoming

a Supreme Court justice is not just an aspiration, but it's something that is absolutely attainable. Lawrence, who are the front riders? Because I suppose the good news is, regardless of what you make of this, and of course, I should say, not everybody is celebrating this. And perhaps we'll get to that. There are a lot of women to choose from. Yeah, I mean, at the moment, the White House has a long list, but within that, there's a kind of short list, at least what the sort of commentariat sees as the sort of front runners. And there's two that stand out, one of which is Katanji Brown-Jackson, who's a appeals court judge in Washington, who Biden already appointed to that court. And then there's another woman called Leandra Kruger, who's a justice on the California Supreme Court, who's very well respected within legal circles and previously worked in Washington as a lawyer,

arguing cases at the Supreme Court. Both of those are kind of the front runners. There's a pretty deep bench of other women as well. And I mentioned not everybody happy about this, saying this is on the Democrat side of this, this is virtue signalling. I mean, I'm paraphrasing some of the complaints about this. And yet Ronald Reagan, of course, hero of the modern Republican Party,

also chose a justice entirely because she was a woman. Yeah, I mean, there's basically a bit of the blowback has been the suggestion that from the right that this is an affirmative action pick and that Biden has sort of, you know, shouldn't have restricted himself to a smaller pool of candidates by saying that he was going to appoint a black woman. But one of the things that that ignores is the fact that ever since the Supreme Court was founded, as I mentioned earlier, it was restricted to white men for a long time. And also that there is a pretty wide field of black women candidates who are perfectly qualified.

So that kind of diminishes this argument that it's somehow an affirmative action pick. What do you make of some of the pushback on this? Of course, you'll be well-versed, Kimberly, in some of the pushbacks that have come, but this particular manifestation at this time? Well, I think it's absolutely what has been said. The question of viability, the question of qualifications, there is always a double standard for women and particularly for women of color in this country. And we've seen,

you know, this current pool of Supreme Court candidates is not the first pool of qualified Black women who could have been put on the court. Most notably was Loretta Lynch during the Obama administration, where because of the Senate configuration, they did not put her up. But she would have been a very logical choice to add to the court. So I think there is always this conversation about, you know, whether or not someone is capable, whether they are qualified. And there are countless Black women attorneys and justices across this country who have met, if not exceeded, some of the professional accomplishments of some of the current justices on the court. So to even question their qualifications and their practice is really quite appalling

and just screams of racism, sexism and misogyny as is always so pervasive, unfortunately, in the political climate as well as in the country overall. And just coming back to what you do, co-founder of Higher Heights, an organisation that builds the political power of black women, because you've just mentioned that and the climate that we're in, I presume you get women coming to you from all political backgrounds. I don't know, you tell me, but do they want to go? Are you seeing an appetite to go into public political life or is it more the activism side? Because I think there is a concern on this side of the pond about who would be an MP, who would be a politician some of the time with what it's like to be one now.

What we're seeing is we are dealing with probably a record high number of Black women who have stepped forward and said that they want to serve. And they step forward because there is something that they want to change in the world. And they see public service and an elected office as the best mechanism to create that change. And so they're willing to roll up their sleeves and put themselves out there as candidates and elected officials to create the change that they want to see in the world, being fully aware of the challenges and how hard it can be.

But the reward of the impact for themselves, their families, their communities, and for the nation overall is what keeps them going. Well, that's cheering to hear. You've got a record number of women going forward. It's just good to hear. Well, thank you very much for giving us an insight. Kimberly Peeler-Allen of Higher Heights and Lawrence Hurley there from Reuters, the U.S. Supreme Court correspondent for Reuters. Just to take Kimberly's words in a way she probably wasn't expecting.

If you talk about people putting themselves out there, we're still getting a lot of messages coming in on thongs. And I just wanted to return to a couple of them. Kirsty says this. This discussion of thongs is killing me. I'm delighted to never wear them again. But would you ever find a man wearing uncomfortable pants for, quote, the look? Girls are conditioned to think their underwear should be uncomfortable from potty training.

I can't believe you brought this up, says Neil. Just because, you know, Kirsty just mentioned men. You brought in the subject of wearing thongs for men. Well, this man doesn't like them at all. The idea of wearing them for men, not men wearing them. That probably is a whole other topic, maybe a whole other show. The only possible excuse for them is no visible panty line,

but as attractive underwear, no thank you. Stylish big pants every time, please, says Neil. In all my 67 years, says Annie, I don't think I've ever worn a style of knicker for a look. I've never thought it should be uncomfortable. And Debbie says, I love thongs. I'm 60 years old this year. I've worn them every day since Miss Selfridge first sold them way back.

I don't wear big pants. They are so uncomfortable. I even go to the doctors with them. With your thong. Right, got that firmly in mind. Well, speaking of medicine, the latest data from the UK Health Security Agency shows that more than one in 10 children starting school in England are at risk of measles because they haven't had their jabs. Vaccine rates for the MMR, which helps protect five year olds against measles, mumps and rubella, have fallen to their lowest level in a decade. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, there's been a concerning drop in the number of children receiving these vaccinations on time,

with some parents perhaps not wanting to burden the NHS or unaware doctors were still offering appointments. And there's also concerns, of course, about hesitancy and this sort of climate around the discussion of vaccines. Professor Helen Bedford from the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health. Good morning. Good morning, Emma. What do you put this down to? I think it's a combination of things. So when we had that first lockdown in March 2020, people took it really seriously. And as a result, a lot of people didn't think that either GP services where they could get vaccination were continuing or they were afraid to go because they thought, you know, they may be at risk of catching COVID. And the attention, let's face it, has been very much on COVID for the last two years. And there has been a tendency to forget about the other childhood infections which are

still around. Yes. And I suppose with that, this is kind of what we've talked about, the hidden health impacts of the pandemic. Are you now today talking about this, or certainly being part of this conversation in a bid to get people back out there to do this, to get this sorted? Absolutely. It's really important. The thing about measles is it's incredibly infectious, much more infectious than Covid. It's considered to be one of the most infectious diseases. And because of that, it only takes a very small decline in vaccine uptake before we start seeing outbreaks. Now, we are in a fantastic place where we can stop it in its tracks before we start getting outbreaks, before we start seeing arising cases,

by encouraging not just parents, but young people and young adults to ensure that they've had two doses of MMR vaccine. And what about this climate of the way we are now discussing vaccines? We haven't really had a kind of national conversation about vaccines in quite this way, or certainly not in my lifetime. No, not in my lifetime either. It's been extraordinary. So people are much more well-versed over issues like herd immunity, which means if you have lots of people vaccinated, that stops the spread of disease. Talking about the R number, how effective vaccines are. The thing about MMR vaccine that we mustn't forget is we've been using it in the UK for 35 years. So we've got a lot of experience with this vaccine.

In the United States, it's been used for nearly 50 years. So this is probably one of the most researched vaccines there is. So we can be very sure that it's got a very good safety record. And two doses is highly effective in preventing these diseases. Are there age cutoffs when you have to get one dose by one, the second dose by? No, no age cut-offs when you have to get one dose by one, the second dose by? No, no age cut-offs either. So young adults in their 20s could have two doses of vaccine. There is no upper age limit and there isn't either a maximum gap between doses.

So if a child's had it at 12 months and still not had it later on, they can have the second dose without having to have another first dose. And for those who perhaps are engaging with this, like we were just discussing, you know, this kind of literacy or certainly the language of vaccines that we didn't have before, what would you say to them if they're sort of in that mix of perhaps just more hesitant than they have been before and also haven't been going to the doctors. What would you say to them to have their ear this morning? Well, I would really encourage them, if there's any concerns or questions,

to talk to their practice nurse. Practice nurses are the real driving force between childhood vaccination programmes or their GP or their health visitor. And we need to remind people that measles, a lot of people think of it as a disease in the history books. It's not in the history books. It's a really nasty infection. Even a child with a kind of, you know, ordinary attack of measles, if you like, can feel very ill indeed. But it's also got complications like pneumonia, like inflammation of the brain, and it kills children in countries like the UK. A sobering reminder, if you are listening to this and you just fell into that

camp of COVID stopped you from going, how do you go and get it? What do you do to instigate the catch-up programme or even begin it? Well, if you're unsure if children have had their vaccinations, you can check their children have had their vaccinations, you can check their Red Book, their personal child health record, but otherwise check with the GP, but make an appointment and go and get it done now before we start seeing cases rising. And that's the concern, of course, with this data? Absolutely, absolutely.

They call it the canary in the coal mine, but it's so sensitive to a drop in vaccination uptake that you will see cases emerging very quickly. Professor Helen Bedford from the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health. Good morning and thank you. A message here saying, going back to, I knew this was going to keep going back to our discussion with regards to thongs. I wear both. I have period thongs, which are absorbent and a size up from normal. Period thongs. I'm learning everything this morning on this programme. I think it just depends on your tailbone anatomy.

Not everybody is comfortable with a piece of fabric between their cheeks. Well, thank you for that. And so they carry on. They keep rolling in. But we wanted to end today's programme paying tribute to the renowned singer Norma Watterson, known as the matriarch of the royal family of British folk music who has died. And we wanted you to hear her voice to end today's programme. And here she and her daughter, Eliza Carthy, are singing T stands for Thomas, unaccompanied in the Woman's Hour studio back in May 2007. J-O-N stands for John

W-E-N-M stands for my sweet William Because he is a clever young man Come and sit down with me together on the grass sit down on the grass all very green tis a long three quarters of the

year darling dear Norma Waterson there singing on Woman's Hour in 2007 thank you for your company we'll be back tomorrow at 10 that's all for today's Woman's Hour thank 2007. Thank you for your company. We'll be back tomorrow at 10. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Thank you so much for your time. Join us again for the next one.

My name's Jonathan Myerson, and I wrote and directed Nuremberg, the new scripted podcast from BBC Radio 4. My father was a lawyer, and he worked with several of the British prosecutors who'd been at Nuremberg. So I grew up taking this huge trial for granted, the trial of the major Nazi war criminals. With 6 million murdered and 10 million enslaved, how could these men not have faced justice? But it wasn't until I started researching that I discovered it very nearly didn't happen.

In the end, verdicts were delivered and sentences were carried out. But was it justice or was it vengeance? Subscribe to Nuremberg on BBC Sounds and you can make up your own mind. I'm Sarah Trelevan, and for over a year, I've been working on one of the most complex stories I've ever covered. There was somebody out there who was faking pregnancies. I started, like, warning everybody. Every doula that I know. It was fake.

No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this? From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby. more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this? From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby. It's a long story. Settle in.

Available now.