Woman's Hour - Dame Margaret Beckett MP. Author Susan Cain. And helping women get a job.

Episode Date: April 26, 2022

Dame Margaret Beckett is one of Britain's most celebrated and respected female politicians and will be talking to us about her decision to stand down as an MP at the next elections She was first elected in October 1974. and has been described by Keir Starmer the leader of her own party as a “legend” and a “trailblazer”. She talks about the highlights of her time in politics and her plans for the future.Job interviews can be intimidating at the best of times, but not knowing how to present yourself, what to expect and what to wear can be a huge barrier and it’s easy to get trapped in a cycle of failed interviews and unemployment. Over the last eight years the charity Smart Works has been providing outfits and bespoke coaching to help women re-enter the job market. Most of the referrals come from the Government funded employment agency JobCentre Plus. We talk to Mims Davies Minister for Employment at the Department for Work and Pensions and Kate Stephens the CEO of the charityNow the Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has struck a deal to buy Twitter. Can he balance safety with free speech, and what does this mean for women? we hear from journalist Helen Lewis, staff writer at The Atlantic and former technoology columnist, who has recently left Twitter. And we hear from best selling author Susan Cain who's best known as the author of Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking, Her new book is called Bittersweet: How Sorrow and Longing Make Us Whole. She tells Emma why she believes sadness can be a positive force in our lives.Presented by Emma Barnett Produced by Beverley Purcell

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. It won't have escaped your attention that Elon Musk, the tech billionaire and the world's richest man, has bought Twitter for $44 billion with the apparent aim of unlocking the full potential of the social media platform. He views it as the public square, a place where political leaders and their voters debate the big and small issues of the day. Now, that view may or may not be reflected in your social media usage or how you think about those sorts of platforms. But if you're on it or not, Twitter is a place that impacts and can shape debate. And yet abuse and threats can be a part of the experience across social media platforms,

especially if you are a woman. Mr. Musk has promised changes. We don't quite know any of the details of those yet. Even the Twitter CEO has been saying he's not sure. But how do you use your voice on social media? Has it changed? Do you still bother? Do you see it as a place to share opinions, to exchange views? Or maybe it's just a place to share happy photos of the family. I suppose what I'm getting at is how free do you feel to express yourself in what's being described as the new public square, the digital square?

Or do you feel that you self censor? 84844 is the number you need to text me here at Women's Hour. I hope you feel you can share all here. We do a lot of that day in, day out. I'm always very grateful. Do you think women are using these platforms differently? Do let me know how you see it, how it is with your friends, your family, those around you on social media. S, slightly ironically we are at BBC Woman's Hour, or you can email me through the Woman's Hour website. Also on today's programme, she of quiet fame, Susan Cain, who has taught millions the power of introverts, is now on a new mission to sell the idea of sadness. In a consumer culture hell-bent on happiness, how does that fit in? Sorrow, longing and a feeling she calls bittersweet. All of that to come. But my first guest today

is the UK's longest serving female MP who recently announced her intention to stand down at the next election. The Labour Party leader Keir Starmer, Sir Keir Starmer, has described her as a legend and a trailblazer, and she's respected on all sides of the Houses of Parliament. I am, of course, talking about Labour's Dame Margaret Beckett, the first woman to serve as Foreign Secretary, also the first woman to be elected Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, and briefly serving, very briefly, as Party Leader after the sudden death of John Smith. Under New Labour, you may recall she served as Trade and Industry Secretary, Leader of the House of Commons and also Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. And she's presently Chair

of the Joint Committee scrutinising the National Security Strategy. Dame Margaret Beckett, good morning. Good morning. I think I got it all in there. I think you did. Probably not. There's probably other roles. The point is, you've been doing this a fair while now. And I wonder, taking a step back, do you recommend the life of an MP? Oh, absolutely. Provided, and this is a very important caveat, that you understand that it is a way of life. You know, it's not a job. It's not a profession. It is right across your life. And I mean, I'd been an MP a few months when one of my colleagues said to me, my dear girl, don't you realise you're never not in public?

And if you can't take that, then don't go for it. But if you're not born to wealth and power, it's one of the only ways that you can try and change things. And did you feel that keenly? Yes was a way to have to have a voice i mean i'm very minded of the fact that we're speaking just after i've heard the present deputy leader of the labour party angela reyna has been using her voice uh after the crossing and the uncrossing legs story i'll say in inverted commas in the paper uh the mail Mail on Sunday at the weekend. Of course, she's been just if people haven't followed it, I'm sure many people have now heard of it. She

was accused of trying to distract the Prime Minister from his stride at the dispatch box. Does it feel like the 1970s again? No, but I mean, they do have these lapses. I'm afraid there's always been this little tendency in the Conservative Party that they've got kind of public school boys who really haven't grown out of it. And, you know, every now and then they surface. Yeah, I suppose because that's not to lose sight of the fact that that came from unnamed Conservative MPs. Indeed. And then was reported by the paper. And Sir Lindsay Hoyle, we will be talking, of course, about, you know, how things have changed. But I think just reflect on this for a moment, because you will have seen how the role of women and the perception of women has

changed. The Speaker of the House is now calling a meeting with the editor of the Mail on Sunday. Do you think that sort of, you know, if that has been said, as it seems to have been said by an MP to a political editor, do you think that should be reported? I think there's a question mark over the judgment of the person who said it. There's a question mark over the judgment of the male in deciding to use it. Because I suppose that's the other side of this. If it's said to you as a reporter, report it. You don't have to use it and your editor doesn't have to decide to put it in the paper.

Would you come down on the side of it shouldn't have been a story at all? Good question. Well, I suppose, sadly, it is a story that that kind of attitude still lurks. Yes. But of course, I suppose one of the refrains at this point from the Conservative Party, it lurks in a party which has managed to have not one, but two leaders who are women. Indeed. And the Labour Party still hasn't managed it. I know. Have you come to any conclusions as you are thinking and preparing to step down as to why that's the case?

Margaret Thatcher was an accident. The only reason that she won was because none of the men, they all knew that Ted Heath had to go because he'd become so unpopular. None of the men wanted to stand against him. They thought it wasn't. I thought it was uncomradely or whatever, but she did. And then she reaped the benefit of doing so. But they didn't set out to have a woman. And actually, they were absolutely horrible about her all the time she was leader of the opposition. It was only when she won that she actually acquired sainthood. So, you know, I don't give them any massive credit for that. For us,

I think it's just been people don't realise how much luck there is in politics. And it's just been that it's never been quite the right person in the right place. I mean, Barbara Castle would have been a brilliant first prime minister, but it just was never the right time or place for Barbara. Do you see Theresa May as an accident as well by that extension? Not quite. I mean, to be fair, they were really up against it and they had difficulty. And I think, you know, she'd been Home Secretary for a long time. I say this with some reluctance because, you know, she is another woman and she is a formidable woman with her own strengths. But I think she's an example of the Peter principle that says sometimes people rise, you know, to more and more success until they get to a job

that they actually are not suited for. And I think that was the case with Theresa May. And she probably didn't even realise that herself until she got it. Well, there was also the principle, all those that talk about this, that it was a woman being in a situation, again, to clean up, as they put it, David Cameron's mess. Yes, that's perfectly true. But on the other hand, some of the problems that she had were her own. There were the attitudes and so on that she brought.

Just because misogyny has been in the news with regards to Parliament, and you say, no, it's not like the 70s. Of course it's not. I just wondered, I suppose, if it brought your mind back to that. I think it's worth just reminding our listeners, with the fact that you served as a minister in the Wilson and the Callaghan Labour governments, being first elected in 74. How difficult was it as a woman? How rare were you?

Well, I was fairly rare. I mean, if they asked for a photo call for all women MPs, you only had to look round and you knew whether we were all there or not. But on the other hand, it was what I'd been used to. When I left school, I went into an engineering apprenticeship. So I was then one of 20 women apprentices among 2,400. So actually politics was more woman-friendly from my point of view. Really? There you go, a contrast.

Did you and have you thought and have you, I wonder, had spent any time at all perhaps thinking about how you present yourself? That was also what came up yesterday when I was talking to Caroline Noakes, the Conservative MP. She says she always wears trousers, a skirt of a particular length, these sorts of thoughts that perhaps women have to have because there isn't a uniform. It's a good point. I've never particularly thought about it from that point of view. I've drifted into wearing trousers nearly all the time, although as it happens, I've got a suit on today. You do. Very smart indeed. Thank you. But that was just purely convenience, to be honest.

When you're doing a lot of travelling and my later cabinet jobs all involved a huge amount of travelling and trousers are so much more convenient. Well, one of your greatest achievements was becoming the first woman to be Foreign Secretary. I mean, it's an achievement becoming Foreign Secretary, but as it happens, the first woman to hold one of those great offices of state. And now, of course, another woman in the post, Liz Trust. How was it received, you taking that role at the time? Oh, there was a furor. I suppose there were a few people who were complimentary, but not many. One of your colleagues, Michael Cockerell, said to me, he was making a programme about the Foreign Office, and he said, because I was doing this, you know, I looked up the reaction when you were appointed, and it was horrendous and I'd actually rather forgotten you know you do and it's true and I'm sorry to say quite a lot of it was from women

journalists who obviously thought I wasn't the right kind of woman. What do you think they meant by that? No idea don't really care to be honest. I'll say at this point good for you but I suppose it's one of those moments to reflect on as to why there was that reaction and in the Foreign Office as well. Was it just because it was new, do you think? Well, to be fair, everybody I dealt with day to day in the Foreign Office was pretty well OK. But it was a woman I knew from the Foreign Service because I'd worked with her in other capacities, who sort of tipped me off, if you like, that there were still people in the Foreign Office who didn't think a woman should be Foreign Secretary. But I did regard it very much as their problem rather than mine.

A big part of the portfolio at that time was the Iraq war, a war you voted for. How do you look back on that now as you step down from politics? I think it's one of the classic examples of where there is a story, a myth, I would say, and everybody thinks they know what happened and what it was all about and so on. And actually, an awful lot of it is just plain wrong, just not correct. And I always think that's sad, but you have to live with it. You have to live with the consequences. What do you mean people think of it in different ways, a myth and incorrect? Well, I think I have a horrid feeling that if you asked most people, they'd say, Tony Blair took us to war on a lie and the British people were against it.

It wasn't a lie. It was what everybody believed at the time, incorrectly. And also... So it later was shown to be a lie it was no it depends on what you mean by a lie i feel quite strongly about this i remember robin cook being really taken to the cleaners because he was alleged to have lied to the house of commons he didn't lie he told the house of commons what quite correctly what someone had him, which turned out not to be true. It's if you know it's not true, that it's a lie.

If you say something, it's wrong, it's a mistake, whatever. But it's not a lie unless you know it's not true. And as you see, I feel strongly about that. But also, I think the thing that, you know, they say, oh, a million people, the whole country was against it. No, it wasn't. A lot of people were perfectly understandably, perfectly honorably, and nobody would say that more speedily than Tony Blair, against the Iraq war and quite legitimately so. But actually, the majority of opinion was behind it. And knowing what we know now and the difference there that you've highlighted, do you think of the Iraq war as a mistake?

Probably, but my hesitation is only because I think people have now forgotten what Saddam Hussein was like and what he was doing. And, you know, he was destroying, I mean, he was, he had actually used weapons of mass destruction against defenseless people, against the Kurds. And he was destroying the marshes on which the marsh Arabs lived. He was a horrendous man who had the capacity to do terrible things. And one of the other things that nobody really understands, I think, is that David Kelly, who famously died in the course of those events, took the view, people think he was against the war, he wasn't. He took the view as a weapons inspector, that while Saddam Hussein remained in power, he would seek to have, develop and

threaten to use nuclear weapons. That was his view, not ours. Perhaps not just ours, I should say. I think a lot of people would find it striking that you still hold, you can't say it was a mistake because of course regime change wasn't how the war was was told to the British people as the purpose it was weapons of mass destruction. Well that was the purpose but it turned out that to everybody's astonishment possibly even to his Saddam Hussein no longer had any. So but you still wouldn't go as far to say it was a mistake? Well as I say I think you've got to be honest about these things. And, you know, when it comes to something that became so unpopular as the Iraq War, everybody wants to sort of run a mile and say, oh, no, I didn't really... I think you've got to be honest about the way things seemed then and also about the fact that, as I say, if Saddam Hussein had stayed in power,

maybe he would have done even worse things. And so people wouldn't then have thought it was a mistake. So how things seem now, another woman being foreign secretary, of course, with what's going on in Ukraine. Are we doing the right thing as a country right now? I'm afraid we are. I say afraid because I think it's appalling and terrifying what Russia is doing. But it's quite clear now. I mean, Putin has made some terrible mistakes. The things that it would appear he was most afraid of in terms of NATO coming together and greater solidarity in NATO and so on.

He's actually brought about, I mean, totally, absolutely bizarre mistake. But he's done it. And the position that we have won't be one you think we come to regret in terms of not doing more at the moment? No, I don't think so. I don't think so. Because of fear of escalating? Well, when Putin said that he was, you was, he got all these troops massed there, and he said they were just there on exercise. A lot of people believed him. And they thought he

was threatening, and in order to make the West afraid, but they didn't think he was actually going to do anything. And, you know, I think it was a real shock, even to those who feared he might do something. But he's also said explicitly that it isn't just Ukraine that he thinks should come back into the loving embrace of Mother Russia. It's those other countries who are now in the European Union and in NATO, who he believes have no right to be. So I think that we have to understand now that actually, it wasn't just a flight of fancy. He meant it. And if left alone, that's what he would do. So I'm sure we're doing the right thing. You did a great deal of work in your career, your political career on driving forward the non-proliferation treaty on behalf of the United Kingdom.

You've been an advocate for a world free from nuclear weapons. It seems we're going in the opposite direction. Right now, with what's going on in Ukraine, how worried are you about nuclear war and the direction the UK is going in on this? I am worried, very worried about it. I mean, I was fortunate. Actually, one of the last things I did as Foreign Secretary was to commit the then government in office to do that. And at the time, it looked as if the atmosphere was favorable to move towards the NPT. And actually, there was no disagreement between us and the Conservatives. William Hague took forward that approach to the

Non-Proliferation Treaty. But what I feel now is, first of all, how tragic that the young people of today have to relearn all that stuff that was so familiar to my generation, and that we all thought we'd put behind us. You know, we weren't pursuing non-proliferation as speedily or as fully as one would have wished. But I don't think anybody thought we were going backwards, which at the moment we now are. I mean, Putin has done more to the sheer fact that he invaded Ukraine when they had given up their nuclear weapons. And they had a guarantee from a number of countries, including Russia, that giving up their nuclear weapons would never not mean that they were undefended. I mean, he set back the whole cause of nonproliferation to a tremendous degree, perhaps for a generation. But that's no excuse. I think it means that people have to redouble their efforts

because the danger is so immense. I mean, the number of times the world has come close to the brink of a nuclear exchange, we've been incredibly fortunate not to incur that. When you say redouble our efforts, in what sense? Towards moves towards non-proliferation. Because all over the world... Even though with this threat now with Putin?

Ten times more. Because right across the world, men and women of ill will will be looking at what is happening in Ukraine and thinking, as I think someone said on the radio this morning, on the Today programme, the lesson of Ukraine is get yourself a nuclear weapon. Boris Johnson is, of course, the man ultimately in charge at the moment. And there's reports today in the papers of the shadow cabinet turning towards your leader, Keir Starmer, and saying, stop focusing on Partygate, especially in the run-up to the local elections. It's about focusing on the cost of living crisis.

You know, Partygate's been priced in with Boris Johnson. We don't obviously know how that's going to be. I should say there's a full list of candidates on the BBC's website with that coming up. But why do you think Keir Starmer, even to some of his own shadow cabinet, isn't cutting through enough? Well, I've no idea whether that story is true, actually. So, you know, I haven't heard it being said. I think it's quite straightforward and simple. Boris Johnson has learned a vital lesson from the Donald Trump playbook, and that is be the distraction. Be there every day. Be in the headlines.

It doesn't matter what it is. It doesn't matter if you look stupid. It doesn't matter if people are laughing at you. Just be there. Take the space. And, of course, with COVID, it was perfectly legitimate that space was occupied by that enormous problem. And that wasn't a problem that you could easily, I mean, there were issues about the government's handling. I

mean, this nonsense about how Boris got all the big decisions right, dream on. He made some catastrophic mistakes. But the fact is that the existence of the pandemic meant that Keir couldn't do the kind of job a leader of the opposition would normally do and be attacking on the whole handling of the case. He had to do it with great care and caution because people's lives were not just at stake, they were being lost day after day after day. So I think the atmosphere has been terrible. I was just going to say, but regardless of that story today, there is concern that he still isn't cutting through. And I wonder, from your perspective, do you actually think he can? Oh, yes. And what's as important, although, of course, the one has to precede the other.

He is eminently capable of being the prime minister. And that's one of the things that really matters. Capable versus electable are two different things, though. That's why I said one has to precede the other. And I don't myself at all see why he's considered to be not electable. I think a lot of it is that Boris just takes up. No previous prime minister, as far as I'm aware, has had a personal photographer. He has three at our expense. And he seems to think the job of prime minister is going out and having your photograph taken.

And their job is to keep him in the news media every day and to take up the space and to take up the attention. That's exactly what Donald Trump did. And it's what won him the American election. And Boris is... Maybe Keir Starmer needs to get himself a photographer and start taking up more space and taking up space but it's not a photograph of the leader of the opposition visiting X is not as exciting as a photograph the prime minister visiting X it goes with the territory do you think we'll have another Labour government in your lifetime oh I sincerely hope so I tell you what we'll have another Labour government in your lifetime? Oh, I sincerely hope so. I tell you what, if we don't

we're in deep trouble as a democracy. It's taken quite a long time now, isn't it? Yes. Well, it does sometimes. Who's been your favourite leader? I think probably, without any discredit to any of the others, probably John, John Smith.

Really? Why was that? He was good fun apart from anything else. He was an excellent leader. He would have been a terrific prime minister. And he was good company. At his funeral, Donald Dewar said, John could start a party in an empty house and frequently did. Who's been your least?

Of ours? Of Labour. Well, I'm sorry to say it because he gets a lot of kicking, but I'm afraid Jeremy's leadership was very difficult. Jeremy Corbyn, of course. Because he didn't really... There were lots of things about being leader that he didn't really want to do or be,

and I think that's always hard for everybody, including the person involved. And I think you supported him at first, didn't you? I nominated him. Yes. Because I thought that we had to have that. He wanted to talk about austerity. And I thought it was important to have that element in the debate. So I nominated him. And then I promptly said, of course, don't vote for him. I'm not going to vote for him. But there you go.

You're standing down. I am. What are you going to do for him. But there you go. You're standing down. I am. What are you going to do with that time? To be honest, Emma. Have you thought it through? No, because insofar as I decided that I was going to stand down because I thought that my husband was getting too frail to go for another parliament. So I made up my mind I'd got to stand down for his sake. And then when he died, I sort of found,

slightly to my surprise, that I'd sort of settled to the idea and that I didn't actually want to go, right, OK, I can now do all... Because I'm not having to do this caring side of things. I can now go off and do all... Do I want to do that anymore? No, I'm not sure I've done that. Really? But what I haven't done is I'd never got around

to thinking about a retirement without Leah. He died at the end of last year. I'm very sorry for your loss. Thank you. And a great, you know, talking about women in politics, a huge part of your life with you in politics. Yes. Not an MP, I should say.

No. People behaved as if he was. But came with you to all the party conferences and I'm sure was an amazing support. Yes, tremendous. Well, some things to think about there, I suppose. I recently talked to Harriet Harman, of course, who recently lost her husband.

She talked about the Widows Club that she's found herself in with some support. So I don't know if that's been also a support to you and how you've been with that because, of course, a lot of people have experienced a lot of loss recently. Yes, they have. Well, it sounds like it's been a life or certainly a career, a very full life and a very well-lived life in politics certainly,

but hopefully lots more to come. Dame Margaret Becker, anything you wanted to add? Just that I go back to what I said nearly at the beginning. If you don't think things are the way they ought to be and you'd like to have your say or to contribute in any way, the only way is politics. You can be in... I mean, I did a lot of work on the environment and it was our lead negotiator and so on.

But the only people who are in the room are the politicians. There are lots of lovely, wonderful, worthy people working like hell in the charities and so on. And that's a good thing. And one works with them. But in the end, the decisions are made by the politicians. So get in there. Well, it's funny. We're talking, of course,

about the public square and digital platforms today and people having their voices heard. And I think there's one of my favourite songs from Hamilton, the musical, is The Room Where It Happened. And it's all about being in the room. Absolutely. Where it happens. Being in the room and being there, being there when it starts and being there when it ends. One of the big mistakes people make is they go home because they're fed up. They haven't got to the end of the meeting. Dame Margaret Beckett, thank you very much. Well, let's talk about that public square, shall we?

Because one of the world's richest men, Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX chief executive, has struck a deal to buy Twitter. He's a self-described free speech absolutist, and he's pledging to reduce censorship on the platform, raising concerns amongst human rights groups about potential in rise of hate speech. Of course, though, he's also said he's going to tackle some of that and tackle the bots on the platform.

And Twitter users have been asking about whether accounts that have been suspended may be allowed to return, including who we've just been mentioning, the account of Donald Trump. Well, earlier I spoke to the journalist Helen Lewis. She's staff writer at The Atlantic may be allowed to return, including who we've just been mentioning, the account of Donald Trump. Well, earlier I spoke to the journalist Helen Lewis. She's staff writer at The Atlantic and a former technology columnist who recently left Twitter. And I started by asking her why.

Well, I left it because I'm on book leave at the moment and I wanted to have kind of long interrupted, coherent thoughts, which I felt was something that Twitter was maybe stopping me from having. And I think that's one of the big challenges of the platform, right, is it is, I don't know if you say this physically, but certainly psychologically addictive. So the people who love it really love it. It has a relatively small user base in comparison to Facebook and TikTok, but it shapes the public conversation because journalists are on it, politicians on it, people from civil society are on it. So it does seem to be where a lot of the arguments are had. And I thought, maybe I'm just going to treat myself to not having any arguments for a couple of months. And there has been concern, and this is a bit reflected in some of what he said, the little he said so far, about abuse on there, of course, and how free speech will operate.

And he's known as what's called a free speech absolutist do you think in particular for women it could get better or how do you think it could change or needs to change i think the way to think about free speech in in on must terms is that he believes that good speech chases out bad so he will err on the side of letting people say things and then letting other people counter them there is another model of free speech which is one that i have a great sympathy to which says that if you stand up and you are shouted at immediately by everybody, your free speech is impinged. And we know that for women, we know that for racial minorities, saying something on Twitter is much more likely to

lead to abuse. You know, the public square is much more likely to lead to abuse than it is for a white man. So I think that's a free speech problem too. I don't think it's one that Elon Musk particularly is bothered by. I've never, I free speech problem too. I don't think it's one that Elon Musk particularly is bothered by. I've never, I've seen nothing in his track record that suggests it. One of the things I think will become interesting and a potential flashpoint is

what would he do about misgendering? So that's the idea that if somebody is transgender, you have to use their preferred pronouns and not refer to them as male if they are, for example, a trans woman. That's been a very contentious subject. There will be trans women who will be worried that they can now be misgendered on Twitter. Equally well, there will be gender critical feminists who will think, well, this is good

because I can now call a male sex offender male, even if they identify as a woman. I mean, I sort of think, has he any idea what he's getting into? But if there's one thing to say about Elon Musk, it's that he loves the drama and the chaos, and he's putting himself in the firing line for a huge amount of drama and chaos. So I think he's probably up for it. I mean, there are going to be many of those things that, well, he or the people he employs have to continue grappling with. Have you seen not just on Twitter, but a change in how women are using social media? I think there is a generational change in social media. When I talk to people from Gen Z, they are much less likely to take social media seriously in the way that my generation,

perhaps generations above do. They think they sort of, when I talk to my nephew about it, for example, I think he has a sort of bizarre, he thinks it's bizarre that you would go on deliberately kind of throw chum into the water and then be kind of hurt that people would be nasty to you um and i think there is an interesting thing about having grown up with social media is perhaps chain stuff but we know that for instagram for teenage girls you know from meta's own research that does seem to have a bad effect on some of some teenage girls body image i i would say talking to women i know mostly journalists mostly political journalists who use twitter that they are slightly battered by the kind of response that they often get.

They often find it quite an unpleasant experience. And I think more generally, there are people who feel they have to use Twitter for their job. But if they had their choice, they absolutely wouldn't. I think that particularly applies to female politicians who feel they have to have a presence there. But are getting now used to death threats, for example, just as a routine thing? Yeah, I mean, and of course, that will be something that people will be looking at how that's going to be handled as well. When you mentioned Meta there, of course, the parent company of Facebook and also WhatsApp, of course, and Instagram, just to get the full suite.

And I think ownership is also just an important point to take a moment to pause on. This is another man buying another social network uh it's also a trend of very very rich men buying up media organizations and i was thinking this morning do any women either own these platforms or run these platforms that's a very interesting question um i mean cheryl sandberg is essentially the number two at facebook and she's written a book on feminism quite a controversial uh book on feminism called Lean In, which was very much the 2010s model of kind of what corporate feminism would look like. But you're right, you know, this morning we've got Jeff Bezos, owner of Amazon and The Washington Post, kind of trolling Elon Musk about whether or not China will now have leverage over Twitter, because Elon Musk also owns a company called Tesla, which makes cars. And, you know, China decides to not order any Teslas in a way to try and influence Elon Musk's other business decisions. You know, what does that mean for the service? And I think Emily Bell is a professor at

Columbia, but it's very well, you know, we're talking about things that are essentially almost utilities, public utilities. And yet they are owned by a handful of people and they can change hands with no democratic scrutiny whatsoever. Every time I watch the US Senate trying to scrutinise a social network, a little part of me dies because they seem to treat it sometimes as kind of a tech support forum where they can ask about why their Facebook password isn't working or something like that. We are still not in a great place in democratic understanding of social networks and scrutiny of them, I think.

And I think it's relevant, of course, of who runs these things, because if they are, as he puts it, the public square, how that public square is governed is important. Right, and Elon Musk, I think probably the most famous thing that he's ever done on Twitter is that he called a blameless man a paedophile, and he has used that. I mean, so the amount he's bid for twitter is um 54.20 so it's got the number 420 in it that is a kind of us slacker code for weed

it's an in joke about him wanting to smoke marijuana and that is the kind of thing that you can do when you are a billionaire who is in you know who has more money than you could ever spend in a lifetime you know and he's going to make kind of capricious decisions the big question I don't think anybody knows this I think people have been unusually frank about not knowing this is what he wants to own Twitter for I mean I sort of suspect he's just got a lot of money and he likes wants to safeguard his ability to post whatever he wants but you know is there more revenue to be squeezed out to Twitter is there a way to reinvent what it does in a way that will make it a much more popular service, you know, as big as Facebook? I am not entirely sure about that. But then equally, I feel like maybe I'm not going to bet against Elon Musk, a man who can make rockets land upright.

Helen Lewis there giving her reaction and also what it may take to get her back on to social media, certainly on Twitter. I've come off Facebook, says Emily, but would even be cautious about which posts I liked or commented on, checking who posted them or where the image came from, as I don't want to accidentally be seen to give my vote or seal of approval to an organisation that doesn't line up with my values. It's meant I've always been hyper aware, even about giving too many likes to one group, knowing such posts would then flood my newsfeed and limit my view of what was really happening. Another one, I use my social media only to share photos and stay in touch with others. I do not get involved in any debates as people are so quick to silence and force their own opinions.

Another one with regards to Twitter, I use Twitter as a news source, but over the past few years I felt disillusioned by it due to the sheer amount of hate and trolling. I try to block as much of it out as possible, but it is difficult to avoid. And Cher says, I'll wait and see with regards to Elon Musk taking over. My guess is I will soon be leaving Twitter. And the accumulation of obscene wealth, says Anna, doesn't make you suitable as the arbiter of free speech or indeed any speech.

It's about power and money. A direct response to that takeover. And I've had a Twitter account since 2008, says Margaret, mostly for work or academic reasons, and probably have sent about 15 tweets during that time. You're giving us a flavour of how your usage has perhaps changed or stayed consistent in Margaret's case. But also, if you see these places, these platforms, as the public square, which Elon Musk has described. Now, research from the Fawcett Society has shown

young women from low income households are twice as likely to say that their financial situation has become worse because of the pandemic compared to young men from higher income households. Young women, excuse me, I should say, young women from higher income households. For women trying to enter or re-enter the job market, interviews can present a real barrier, especially if you don't know what to expect in terms of questions, or you don't have the right clothes to wear to them. Shortly, I'll be talking to Mims Davis, the Minister for Employment at the Department for Work and Pensions. But joining me now is Kate Stevens, the Chief Executive of the charity Smartworks, which has been providing outfits and bespoke coaching to help women who are trying to get and land those jobs through

interviews. Most of the referrals come from the government funded employment agency Jobcentre Plus. And I should say I'm familiar with what Smartworks does because I'm a patron of it. But Kate's on the line now. And I think with people thinking about coming out of the pandemic and recovery, tell us a bit about the service that you provide and what women are coming to you saying they need. Thanks, Emma. Yeah, no, SmartWorks is here really to give women the confidence they need to be able to look great, feel good about who they are and really succeed at interviews. So it's about the clothes and the coaching, but it's also about that moment when a woman can really reconnect with who she is, be her best and shine at this really important moment, which is her job interview.

Some people would be thinking, you know, you can get relatively cheap skirts and blazers now or trousers and blazers, whatever you would like to wear for a smart setting. Do you find actually women don't have those things? Yeah, they don't. People really don't have access to that kind of wardrobe. So we are providing a need also there's something quite complex going on and i think everybody has felt that moment where you don't feel that you're allowed to wear those clothes or to look like that i think if you've been out of work or you've been you know you've had a difficult time what we're doing at smart

works really is given women a permission to look and feel great about who they are so you, you know, we'll give them the clothes and say, you can do this. You can you can choose to wear that. You can be that person. And there is this brilliant moment where she'll look in the mirror and just drop her shoulders and smile and think, yeah, I can do this. I've got it. The other side of it is the interview training. I mean, tell us a bit about that and what the barriers that the women are saying to you about trying to get back into the workplace yeah it the coaching is a crucial part of it because you know you've got to look good and make the impression when you go in there but you have to sustain a

performance in interview and you know we're hearing lots from our clients that they don't feel confident explaining gaps in CVs they don't feel confident asking questions about what they've been doing with their lives. And just those very typical, if I may say, often female traits to over-apologise or over-talk about what they've been doing. So the coaching is very much led by the clients, but equally, it's all focused on that interview moment and allowing you to really sell yourself so that you can make the best impression and get the job. Kate Stephens, thank you very much. Chief Executive of SmartWorks. Let's talk now to Mims Davis, Minister for Employment at the Department for Work and Pensions.

Mims, the confidence point is key, of course, getting back in there and, of course, feeling like you know what to do when you're in that interview. The numbers at the moment show that the female unemployment rate is down to 3.6%. It's at 18,000 below pre-pandemic levels. But what can you say about the nature of the jobs women are going into? Morning, Emma. Yeah, it's pleasing that actually 1.9 million women since 2010

have gone into the workplace. But as we just heard, it's not that simple for every woman. And it depends what's going on in the rest of their lives. They could be caring, they could be sandwich caring, they could be a women returner, or indeed, as you've spoken about a young woman who's really nervous about going into the workforce, perhaps for the first time. And in in fact there's some pleasing numbers that we've had through our kickstart scheme 160 000 plus young people have gone into their first roles because of employers stepping forward and giving young people that first opportunity to get onto the employment ladder but i fully agree with the confidence point

this i hear absolutely at every age and career stage of the people that we're working with in Jobcentre Plus. So the Smart Works programme is something that we are supporting. We've also been working in Bristol, for example, with the Women's Work Lamp. Again, that's about women returners and that confidence for that first interview and stepping back into the labour market. The Women's Budget Group has said that decreasing unemployment rates are an important indicator of economic recovery. But a focus on job quality as well as numbers is just as important as women's employment is increasingly precarious and concentrated in low paid work. So we've got a situation where the headline number may say one thing, but the reality of the security of that job for women and what it pays, while your government has of course presided over

a cost of living crisis, is completely different. So I think, Emma, you're absolutely right about the quality of work and the progression opportunities and in fact we've just started this month uh progression champions across our job center plus network over 900 job centers in each and every community with our work coaches helping people to progress with a mantra at dwp it's abc any job better job and a career and we're there to help you all the way through that. And in fact, I must single out particular employers. Sorry, before we just launch into a bit of a speech there, what progression can you get in a job that's precarious and is low paid at a time when bills are rising? So first off, I'm really not a fan of job snobbery. I think it's really important

for people to find a role that works for them. They can get into the labour market, they can get confident, they can build from there. And I was just about to say, for example, employers like Green King have been fantastic, particularly with women and women returners, who perhaps people may be joining them just to do a few shifts around child care and around getting back into the labour market and actually have got a wonderful apprenticeship and management progression pathway so something that perhaps you were just going in to dip your toe in could actually be one of the most fulfilling and positive moves in your career so I'm all for employers doing that and And that's what we do through our National Employer Partnership and through our outreach that we do in our job centres.

I wasn't being snobby. I don't think there's anything snobby about wanting to be able to pay the bills. If your job does not pay enough and your job is not secure, away from an individual company that you've just named what is this government doing to improve the quality of those jobs and the pay during an extraordinary cost of living crisis that your government's presided over so we have a progression agenda as i said we've got people in our job centers whether they're 50 plus champions, whether they're supporting people coming out of domestic abuse, whether they're leaving the forces and veterans, we are there to help people on the next stage of their career pathway. And sometimes it isn't the most glamorous and exciting roles

starting with, but we absolutely want to help them to move into those better paid and progress positively into the next stage of their career. The reality is that actually, I'm not sure if you can still hear me because it looks like we may have disconnected. No, no, we're hearing you. You've got to start somewhere. Oh, great. And we're determined to help people on that next stage.

You're absolutely right women can very often be in more precarious scenarios and absolutely right that we work with people like smart works and others to help people to to move forward in fact every single day we've got employers in our job centres interviewing people as part of our way to work campaign i was just recently um in a job centre in Crawley where linked to Gatwick Airport and the bounce back of tourism and aviation, there are 5,000 roles out there.

And employers are absolutely being flexible and supportive for women, understanding around caring and other responsibilities, training needs they might have as well. And we're working very directly with the MOJ. I was there yesterday with Minister Atkins, working on youth employment for those people with an offending background. I think there's a sort of missing connection here

between what I'm asking and perhaps the bit that you're responding with, where it's not about getting people out of unemployment, although I accept that's incredibly important, and I'm not denying that. It's about the quality of the jobs and the amount that they pay. And that's what I mean by the quality, not what they're doing. It's about the amount that they pay. The Resolution Foundation has calculated the cost of living crisis will push 1.3 million households into absolute poverty. In fact, the chief executive of that said, after the Chancellor's spring statement, that he was surprised at the overall package. When what was on offer for lower income households, it's an odd choice to have basically offered next to nothing to these households in this spring statement. And in the papers today, it's been

widely briefed to political journalists. Boris Johnson's holding a cabinet meeting this morning about the cost of living crisis, telling ministers to do everything possible to help with those rising costs. Well, job security and higher wages are a key part of this. And women are going into, more often than not, those more precarious roles and are being paid lower wages and unable to work as many hours sometimes as they would like. What is your department at the Work and Pensions doing to address that?

Well, our Secretary of State is at that table today. There's a big focus that we have on working across government on childcare and the Flexible Support Fund can help people with clothing travel training child care as you move into work and universal credit doesn't disappear if you move into work so if you move into part-time work you will be better off and in fact if you move into full-time work because of the changes to the work allowance and the taper rate you could be up to six thousand pounds better off but the benefits are not rising with inflation and there's concern about squeezing with the poorest. Emma, I think this is important. Yesterday, we announced a big push on the move to UC. So there are many people, particularly women on legacy and child tax credits

who could be better off. In fact, 1.4 million people could be better off. That's around 55% of the caseload. We are actively helping people to find out by moving to UC, getting that wider benefit support and some of the stuff we talked about in job centres and how that can help them. We've got things like sector-based work academies focused on women's support, for example, moving into the construction industry, the rail industry, which can be often much better paid jobs than perhaps those starter jobs we've discussed. But for some people, it is a start.

You said don't be a snob about the type of work. When I was just asking about, it's not about the type of work. You've now just said these are better jobs. Which is it? I'm talking about the jobs that are available to the poorest in society not paying enough during the cost of living crisis. So you can't have it both ways. Yeah, we can. It's both. You could be stepping into the labour market for the first time and we'll help you with the right role for you. Or indeed around the progression agenda,

which I mentioned, where it's about earning more and taking that next step and making sure time and will help you with the right role for you or indeed around the progression agenda which I mentioned where it's about earning more and taking that next step and making sure you're better off and using all those skills you've got in that first role. Let's talk again then, let's talk again, it'd be great to have you back and maybe we could get a couple of the women on some of those schemes that you've talked about and we'll hear a bit more about their lives, but also those who perhaps feel that this government isn't doing enough at the moment. Perhaps those that Boris Johnson's thinking of this morning, having assembled his cabinet

with regards to the cost of living. It'd be good to have you back on when we have perhaps a bit more time as well, but we appreciate your time this morning. Right, I'm going to go to one of our presenters and sit in action. I'd love to get you down to meet some of the work. Your line did slightly cut out there, but I think there was an invitation.

I will follow up on it. Mims Davis, Minister for Employment at the Department for Work and Pensions. Thank you. And I'll come if I can to some of your messages with regards to what the minister was just having to say. But let me go now to Susan Cain, best known as the author of Quiet, The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking. That spent seven years on the New York Times bestseller list. Now she's on a new mission to sell the idea of sadness in a world hell-bent on happiness and a lot more as well. I probably haven't summarized it quite as well as she will, but the book is called, the new book, Bittersweet, How Sorrow and Longing Make Us Whole. Susan Cain, good morning. Good morning. So nice to be here with you.

It's lovely to have you with us. I remember watching your TED Talk as that quiet book emerged from at the time, and so many more millions have as well. At Bittersweetness, though, do you mind telling us more? Yes. So this book is actually the result of kind of a five-year quest to grasp the power of a bittersweet and even melancholic way of being and what i've learned is that the bittersweet tradition is centuries old it spans continents it's all over the globe um and it tells us essentially that we are creatures who are born to transform pain into beauty and that light and dark, that bitter and sweet, that joy and sorrow always go together. But that what comes with the realization of that truth is a kind of piercing joy at the beauty of the world.

And one of the ways you explain this is we listen to sad songs far more than we listen to happy songs. Yes, it's interesting. There's research showing that people who like sad songs listen to them about 800 times on their playlist, whereas people who prefer happy songs listen to them only 175 times. Yeah, there's something about listening to sad music that people will consistently tell researchers connects them with a sense of awe and wonder and transcendence. So there's something about tuning into these states of being that connects us to creativity and to each other, even though we're living in a culture that tells us not to go there, that these states of being are dangerous or painful or to be avoided.

What do you make of the idea that when you're a child, you can't quite remember, there's a whole period of time where you don't think about how you feel. And then you do think about how you feel and you appraise it. And the culture we live in a lot of the time, certainly the Western culture, is trying to tell you to be happy. I mean, are you trying to tell people to be sad and happy at the same time? Or how would you answer that question?

I am telling people to tell the truth. And the truth of existence is that it involves happiness and sadness. It involves joy and sorrow. We tell our children and we tell ourselves that only the happy side of the ledger is acceptable. And this actually makes it more difficult, especially for children, but for all of us. It makes it more difficult when troubles come our way because we're so accustomed to denying the truth that we think that troubles are something out of the ordinary. And so we've got a big resistance to it instead of just telling the truth about what life is like and seeing the beauty in that.

Do you feel better when you let yourself, if I can put it like this, feel melancholic, feel some of those feelings that we are told to turn away from? It's not, I mean, all of us prefer to feel happy than sad. And that is true of me, as well as of every other human being, of course. What feels better is when you can actually tell the truth. And this is why we like sad music the way we do because we feel that there is a musician or an artist expressing on our behalf what life is sometimes like and there's a tremendous sense of connection that we feel to humanity in general when that truth gets expressed. I mean, women are often, if I can put it like this,

the happiness monitors in families if they have children, making sure everyone's okay. Maybe if they don't as well, you know, maybe their parents around them. And then there's that saying, you're only as happy as your least happy child. Do you think we've got the emphasis wrong though? Do you think we should be helping children focus on the painful, the harder emotions as well? Well, I mean, as parents, and I'm a parent myself, that expression, you're only as happy as your least happy child, it's absolutely true. That expression is very accurate. But in terms of what we teach our children, and I'll tell you quickly a story. I went with my children, my husband and I went with our children to take a vacation. We rented

a house in the countryside. The children fell in love with some donkeys that lived in a field next to the house. And it was this grand summer romance. And then the day before we needed to leave, the children were crying themselves to sleep because they realized they would never see these donkeys again. And we tried all the things that parents would say in such a situation, like, you know, maybe we'll come back or maybe another family will come and take care of the donkeys. And none of this helped at all. What helped was when we said to the kids, well, goodbye is part of life and you felt this before and you're going to feel it again. And it's not, and the sting of it will go away in a few days and you'll be able to look back

at this memory with fondness. But for now, just know that this is part of what life is. And that's when they stopped crying because I think they sensed they were being told the truth and that their experiences were being validated for what they were instead of what we usually try to do is kind of say, no, we're going to make it go away or no, the experience isn't real. There's something about embracing all of experience that is liberating for our kids and for us. And you talk about the connection between sorrow and longing and belonging, don't you? Yes, because this question of longing, we come into this world, we are beings who come into this world longing for a more perfect and beautiful world from which we feel we've been banished. And we see this in all the world's religions.

You know, there's the longing for Eden, the longing for Mecca, the longing for Zion. We see it in the Wizard of Oz with Dorothy longing for somewhere over the rainbow. This is a core impulse of humanity, but it's also at the root of our creative impulse. We become creative because we are trying to close that gap between the world that we live in and the world that we long for. And, you know, it drives you, obviously, that sadness can drive you, however you want to term it, to, as you say, create and do more. There's a message from Anna who's listening. Anna Louise, she says, if you've never known sadness or unhappiness, how could you recognize joy or happiness?

Yes, that's right. I mean, one is the shadow of the other, you know, the light and the dark, they go together. And this is something that our poets and musicians and psychologists now too have been trying to tell us for centuries. We, in recent years, have not been listening, but I think that we are in a moment where we're open to hear this message again. Well, I think also with the news agenda, you know, people trying constantly to reconcile this push to feel happy, and then they'll see real world events. It's a very salient message. Yeah, and it's actually interesting what happens when we go through periods of collective

difficulty. For example, in the United States, let me say when we go through periods of collective difficulty, for example, in the United States, let me say, when we go through periods of collective difficulty, we tend to, at those moments, seek meaning. So in the United States, after 9-11, for example, people started applying for jobs as firefighters and teachers and nurses. There was a big change there. I'm so sorry, Susan, but our time has run out. But the book is called Bittersweet, How Sorrow and Longing

Make Us Whole. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Thank you so much for your time. Join us again for the next one. I'm Sarah Treleaven 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. It's a long story, settle in. Available now.