Woman's Hour - Kids social media ban in Australia, Tracey Emin on Bridget Riley, What your bum says about your health

Episode Date: November 26, 2025

Australia’s under-16 social media ban comes into force soon. From 10th December, platforms must take 'reasonable steps' to stop under-16s from opening accounts and remove accounts that already belong to them. Companies who fail to comply could face fines of up to £25m. BBC Sydney Correspondent Katy Watson has been talking to teenagers in the state of Victoria. She explains how we got here and updates us on a new legal action being brought to challenge the ban.Ever wondered what your bottom says about your health? A new study of over 60,000 people reveals that subtle changes in the shape of your buttock muscles can reveal when people are heading towards type two diabetes. The study was carried out by the University of Westminster. Louise Thomas, Professor of Metabolic Imaging who is the senior author of the study, joins us alongside personal trainer Jacqueline Hooton.We talk to the author of a review of how the justice system treats girls. They can no longer be sent to Young Offenders Institutes as a result of Susannah Hancock's recommendations, but she says there is still plenty of work to be done and much of the remaining custodial accommodation needs improvement. Pippa Goodfellow, Deputy Director of Policy, Communications and Strategy at the National Children’s Bureau, who will serve on the government’s new advisory board on these matters, also joins us.A new exhibition, ‘Learning to See,’ by the abstract artist Bridget Riley has opened at Turner Contemporary in Margate. There are 26 of her most recent works on show - large canvases, studies and works painted directly on the wall. To talk about Bridget’s life so far and the significance of her work, Nuala McGovern is joined by artist Dame Tracey Emin, Melissa Blanchflower, senior curator of the exhibition and Dr Frances Follin, author of Embodied Visions: Bridget Riley, Op Art and The Sixties.Presenter: Nuala McGovern Procuer: Simon Richardson

Hello, this is Nula McGovern, and you're listening to The Woman's Hour podcast. Hello and welcome to the program. Well, two teenagers are challenging Australia's upcoming social media ban for children in the nation's highest court. They are alleging that the law is unconstitutional as it robs them of their right to free communication. We're going to hear how the law is going down with young people down under. And I'd also like to hear from you. Where do you stand on a social media ban for children? under 16, something you'd applaud or would you support the teenagers that are challenging it?

I'd particularly like to know how social media has helped or hindered your child. You can text the program, the number is 84844 on social media. We're at BBC Woman's Hour. Or you can email us through our website for a WhatsApp message or voice note. The number is 0-3-700-100-444. Also today, we're going to get to the bottom of what your bottom can tell you. you about your health. The gluteus maximus is our largest muscle and according to new research our buttocks can change shape when we are at risk of diabetes and it presents differently for

men and for women. We'll also spend time discussing the new exhibition by the influential abstract artist Bridget Riley including new works by the 94 year old and one of my guests will be another influential artist Dame Tracy Eman and also this hour we want to talk about girls in custody the government has set out reforms for this very small number of girls that are in the criminal

justice system but some believe the reforms do not go far enough we will find out why but let us begin as I mentioned on December 10th Australia plans to introduce the world strict as laws governing how children access social media

with an outright ban on children under 16 using social media platforms. So that includes the likes of Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, and the streaming platforms kick and Twitch. So under 16s with accounts on those platforms have already been getting messages telling them they are about to be suspended or deleted. Now, two of those teenagers are challenging the law in Australia's High Court, alleging the law is unconstitutional because it robs them off.

their right to free communication. That all just happened this morning that that news came in about the challenge. Well, we want to know how young people and their parents in Australia are seeing it. We have Katie Watson, the BBC Sydney correspondent who's been following this change in the law

and speaking to young people. We'll hear from some of them in just a moment. Katie, welcome. Good to have you back on Woman's Hour. Why did the Australian government take this path to bring in this law? well so they say it's about protecting young Australians at a critical age of their development the e-safety commissioner which is effectively the online the online regulator they say this is not a ban

this is a delay but certainly when the legislation was announced by prime minister Anthony Albanese and the plans to do this last year he very much made the point that this is about getting teenagers off the screens and onto the footy field and the fact that he had parents' backs on this. This is really important to stand with the parents. Enough is enough. This is about mental health, making sure that they can grow up away from pressures

and risks when exposed to the likes of social media. So that is the government's ambition. And I mentioned a number there that would be affected. There are platforms like Google Classroom or YouTube Kids that's owned by Google's parent company Alphabet are unaffected. So there's a couple little areas, perhaps, where children under 16 can go? Yeah, so they're not wanting to target educational

platforms that things that are used, you know, to be able to help kids with technology. The conditions for the restriction on the ages is, effectively, the sole purpose has to be online interaction between users that, you know, could have material posted on the surface. So it's about that kind of that social interaction. But as you mentioned, you know, if you mentioned Google Classroom, there's YouTube kids. There are other things.

So messaging is unaffected as well as gaming. And actually, that's one of the things that is increasingly talked about. In fact, I've just been at this like parents forum. I'm at a school, Padreau College, which is just about an hour and a half outside of Melbourne. And one of the parents put their hands up and said, what about the likes of Roblox? and there was this kind of hush and a big kind of murmur in the room and everybody going, exactly. So there are huge emissions that a lot of people feel, you know, and just not part of this so-called ban. And do we know why?

Because messaging is a way of interacting socially on some form of media and gaming. I mean, kids chat to each other directly there. I know myself from doing this program, it's a place where cyberbullying can take place. Exactly. So I think this is this is one of the discussions. I've been speaking to, you know, academics and politicians and, you know, parents and kids. And I think there's this huge discussion. Why is it not included? Is it a bunch of slightly, you know, older politicians making up rules for younger people who know far more about technology and, you know, really don't understand? I mean, there were a lot of people who felt that, you know, why are certain platforms targeted? There's 10 platforms in total that are targeted. There are plenty more out there that are not. And the risk, of course, being is that they can they'll no longer be on these platforms so kids will find other platforms to go on why is gaming not included because the idea being is that you know according to legislation people go on to the to those gaming platforms to play a game if the game wasn't there would they be on those platforms but of course it takes away from this

idea that people are also going on there for social interaction and so yes it's a flaw that people are definitely talking about here in Australia the government hasn't said anything specifically on that at the moment or any moves? So their view is that this isn't perfect, this is legislation, this is a start and that it will be dynamic. So for example, when it was announced, there were, I think, nine different platforms and just in the last couple of days, and there'd be adding to that, and that they say is likely to continue. So it might be that as soon as they work out that another platform is perhaps being used too much and that that

appears to be a threat. As somebody described it or has described, several people have described it to me, this could be a game of whack-a-mole. That was trying to find the platforms. That was exactly the phrase Katie that was coming to my mind as you were laying out

what the landscape looks like. You talk about the word dynamic as well just this morning as I was coming into work. I see that two 15-year-olds backed by a rights group, the Digital Freedom Project, are arguing that the ban disregards the rights of children. One of them is Macy Nalind has said in a statement, we shouldn't be silence. It's like

Orwell's book 1984 and that scares me. Could they stop the ban coming in or the delay as the government would call it? This has been talked about. In fact, Australian media have also previously reported that Google, which owns YouTube, had also be considering launching a constitutional challenge. I mean, certainly there's been a lot of anger about this. and about the right way to go about it, whether this is the government for the government to do, should this not be down to social media companies, you know, but there are plenty of people who say,

well, social media companies just haven't done enough and if it's about threatening them to make sure that they can comply and make the online world safer, maybe that's what they need to do. So, yeah, I mean, this challenge, it might throw something up, but certainly the proponents of the legislation that they're not going to be cowed,

that they're going to continue. I think that the challenge brings up an interesting point is that who are you talking about with, when it comes to children being protected, there are plenty of people and there are plenty of young people I've spoken to who say this is a good thing, but there are also people for example, you know, there might be neurodiverse teens, there might be children living in remote and rural areas who depend on their, you know, online communities much more than, you know, a typical COVID in just outside the city where I am. And I think that is a certain concern is these minority groups perhaps

are not being considered when they talk about this blanket ban Yeah, a lot of messages actually coming in, Katie, I can see. But you have been with young people at a school in Victoria and Australia. I want to bring a little of what they had to say in response to this law to our listeners. Many social media platforms,

I should let our listeners know, already restrict accounts to those who are over 13 in Australia. Chloe begins, she's 17, and she's talking about just how ineffective that restriction is. Currently there are lots of ways if you're 13 or 12 or 11 to like get past that age restrict and then still like for example if you're on Instagram you can put it in a fake age and it's way easier to like escape that if that makes sense rather than this ban

which will fully like cut it out. So as somebody who none of you have had to face this ban and you're all going to get away with it, do you feel that if you'd had a ban that might have been better for your early teenhood. Billy 17. I definitely agree with that because like two, three years ago, I would use my phone quite a bit and I actually deleted social media of my own accord due to how addicting it was and how much time it was taking. Alex 18, I also think there can be a lot of benefits though. Like obviously being a teenager is already a really isolating experience. I think it can help connect you socially with people a lot of the time. And it can help connect communities as well

together, especially if you're living rurally or you've got interests that people around you might not have. It's also news-wise, I know I get a lot of my news from feeds from news social media accounts and stuff, and I think it's part of being a global citizen as well as keeping connected with that

and making sure that you know what's going on. Is there a feeling among you that a bunch of older politicians are coming up with rules that actually are completely irrelevant to young people, or do you think it's actually a good thing that they're doing this? Chloe, and I'm 17. At the end of the day, their generations are the ones that created this technology.

And it's not our generation's fault that we're exposed to this technology and that it's part of our lives. And because it's such a big part of our lives, that can actually create more isolation. Alice 17, I also think the government is sort of using the ban just to position social media as the cause for all of these problems instead of investing more time and money into the root issues amongst youth,

such as mental health and all of the things that they believe social media is causing. Well, so interesting to listen to them, Katie. Thank you so much for bringing us those voices. And a couple of the points that were being made there. The one about global citizen as part of being a global citizen. Here's a message from Alish in Brighton. She says, I absolutely agree with the ban on social media

for children under 16. personally I think it'll save lives children can still communicate why can't they meet in person so much of today's world is online and that is sad to see I want to see governments and those in power do something positive about this

before another child ends up dead because of harmful content and of course that's talking about how she sees that role of social media instead this is Lucy in Newcastle a social ban in my opinion

would prove pointless and damaging this generation have become better politically informed better communicators, better creatives, thanks to being able to engage with their interests across the globe. Also certain sections of kids, find their homes and people online. A social media ban

to me is silly and far too rational when better ideas could be used. And another one. The problem with a ban is that kids will find a way around it while it releases the media companies from taking any responsibility for their content.

I mean, you alluded to that, Katie. And the one thing we do know about teenagers is that they can be very creative. They can. And certainly, you know, there was a discussion here about people putting kind of like old man masks on and making, and making and tricking. Because what these companies are having to do and there's been a big report on it and a big kind of project, companies have to have an age assurance technology to make sure that these kids are not getting online. And actually, this whole legislation puts the onus on the company. It's their responsibility to do

it. If not, they face a fine. of about 50 million Australian dollars that's about 25 million pounds which is is big but but the other argument is they make millions of millions of millions of pounds every day a day is it enough especially and somebody a parent pointed out just earlier Australia is a small market you know it's like 20 what 26 million people if it's not you know profitable will they go and leave and go elsewhere we're not talking about the US we're talking you know a small population but certainly you know the owners is on the companies it's not on the kids and it's not on the parents that it's the companies that have to be responsible

for making sure, taking reasonable steps, that's in the legislation, is reasonable steps, to make sure that those under at 16s are not opening kids' accounts or teen accounts, because that's what's not open to the kids.

They could still access it by using their parents. Yeah. Or being given that access to it, but it's about having to make sure that they themselves don't get the account. I'm thinking about older brothers and sisters myself. But with that, do they give an idea of how they're going to insure age verification?

So they've all been working on age verification. I'm sure a lot of these big companies are probably on it anyway. But certainly there's been an age assurance trial here. Companies going on a trial to work out whether their software and their technology is good. And then obviously companies can choose which age assurance. You know, they're free to choose how they go about it. They just need to make sure they're doing it. And look, no of none of the big tech companies, certainly they're not wanting to speak to us ahead of the ban.

I think they're all pretty annoyed. Even Meta, who and the likes of Instagram and Facebook, they announced that they would be cutting off under 16s on the 4th of December. So kind of getting ahead of the ban and people are still now getting messages saying you will be cut off. You alluded to that a while back. you know, they are doing it, they're complying with it, they don't agree that the ban is the way to go about it and that's definitely

the message that's still coming through loud and clear. So interesting. Another message Katie coming in as we've been speaking. Former autistic daughter, failed by the education system and out of school for the past three years, social media has been her lifeline. She is a complete recluse and rarely leaves the house struggling with anxiety

and poor mental health. She educates herself by following a neuropsychiatrist, biologists, historians and political commentators as well as the standard teenage stuff I truly believe that social media has saved her life 844 if you'd like to get in touch it's so interesting because there's such a range of opinions from people speaking about their experience

or indeed their child's experience thanks so much for bringing us all those voices all the way from Australia that is Katie Watson do watch out she will be reporting over the coming days she's our BBC Sydney correspondent and thanks also to all the children of course, who contributed also to this item. Now, have you ever wondered what your bottom says about your health?

Well, you might want to take a look back there every now and again because a new study over 60,000 people that were studied reveals that subtle changes in the shape of your buttock muscles can reveal when people are heading towards type 2 diabetes. The study was carried out by the University of Westminster and Louise Thomas is here, Professor of Metabolic Imaging, who is the senior author of the study.

We also have personal trainer, Jacqueline Houton. Good morning to both of you. Good morning, Louise. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Now, let's start with this study. That's a lot of people, 60,000.

I'm also wondering, like, who had the idea, oh, we should check out people's bottoms and figure out what that means for diabetes. So we haven't actually scanned these people ourselves. These are the amazing volunteers who are part of the big UK Biobank study and there are actually 100,000 people who've been scanned.

And we're really interested in measuring body composition from MRI. So we measure everything between the neck and the knees, your fat, your muscle and all of the organs. But we are particularly interested in the gluteus maximus because it's the biggest muscle in the body and it's really important for all sorts of things we do. And when we talk about gluteus maximus,

what are we talking about? Like the cheeks off your bottom, both of them? Yes, these are your buttes. muscle. Okay. So somebody decided to take a look at that largest muscle and what did you find? So this was my colleague Marjola and she's an expert at measuring the shape and size of organs. And what she did, she looked at the size of the gluteus maximus in all these people. And she found as we age, this muscle is shrinking. But the really interesting thing she found is that the shape changes, particularly in people with type 2 diabetes

and we could see changes in the shape before we saw big changes in volume or size. So in the men, the gluteus maximus muscle, we see regional thinning, shrinking in certain areas whereas in women it seems to increase in certain areas. Can you explain what that would look like? Yeah, it's not saying you probably see by looking at your bottom. This is actually the muscle itself.

In women, the increases, we don't, think it's not an increase in healthy muscle. What we're seeing is the amount of fat stored inside the muscle is getting greater. And that's particularly bad for things like type 2 diabetes. Were you surprised to find that difference between men and women particularly? Yes, we were surprised. We did expect to see similar changes. But then this does fit with what we know about body composition.

Men and women have got very different amounts of fat and muscle where it's stored. So we do see quite big gender difference. in body composition in general. You know, a lot of times, I would say people talk about the fat in a waistline, for example, and, you know, BMI, of course, there's been discussions about that and how useful it can be. But why is a muscle, and particularly our largest muscle, so important? Well, muscle quality is hugely important. If you think about type 2 diabetes, our muscles become resistant to the action of insulin.

So we stop being able to store or uptake glucose into the muscles and we start storing lots of fat in our muscle. Now that is a real risk factor for not just things like type 2 diabetes, but frailty. I mean, we're more likely to have falls in older age as we're losing muscle and our muscle is becoming poorer in quality. Would the average person, I was saying, kind of take a look back there,

but the average person, how would they even know, Has this got any practical implications, do you think, that somebody can work on? I don't think we're going to be scanning the population and looking at the shape of their muscles. But there is a lot you can do to improve your health. I think it's just being aware of how our muscle health is important for disease and being more physically active. That can be really helpful. Well, let me bring in personal trainer, Jacqueline Huton, her garden gym.

Lots of people will be familiar with her on Instagram. She's also written about this, about keeping strong, particularly as we age. Jacqueline, have you thought about your gluteus maximus? Yeah, definitely. It's one of those daily thoughts I have. No, no, I mean, we know that training the glutes is really important along with all strength training,

but there's a lot we can do to support this muscle, this important muscle group. So things like a sit to stand from a chair, your squats, lots of people will have heard about squats, but if that doesn't feel achievable, literally standing sitting up and down from a chair, a solid chair will help work the glutes, things like lunges, walking lunges. Now, if you can't do that, you could do something called a split squat, where we've got the knee, a right angle at the front knee, right angle at the back knee,

and we're literally going down and up in place. So there's so many things that we can do to support the retention of strength in this muscle, and to stop that muscle atrophy, the loss of muscle, which is obviously, We know that's really detrimental to health. And as you've just mentioned here, frailty and the risk of falls and so on. And do you think if it atrophies somewhat, can you get it back? We can certainly see strength gains at every age. But obviously prevention is better than cure, but we would never say it's too late.

You know, there's lots of studies to show that as we've got older, when people are in their 80s or whatever, we can still improve strength. So I think that the overall focus for me is always talking about whole body strength. So I understand it's really interesting this latest research. And we know that muscle atrophy in itself is a problem for deteriorating health and a number of functional issues as we get older. So it's, yeah, it's incredibly important. I'm just thinking about because sometimes I see on, I talked about social media earlier,

but social media feeds, they often have these little challenges, don't they, Jacqueline? You know what I mean, particularly that sit to stand. Is that something that you think about? I think anything that encourages people to move is great. So I think the little fitness challenges are always good fun and people get engaged with that. But that sit to stand, I mean, essentially if people can squat, you know, think every time you go to the bathroom,

you need to be able to sit down to the toilet and be able to stand up again. That's what we're talking about. We're talking about those muscles that allow you to do that. So if you can't do a body weight squat that's why I often talk about sit to stand because the time when we tend to be losing this muscle is when we're older

and many people would find a squat kind of a bit intimidating and challenging which is why I often talk about the sit to stand exercise. Many of us are sitting down right now. So if we're going to do our sit to stand it's don't use the hands, right? Absolutely. So try not to use the hands,

cross the hands over the chest. We're doing it in the studio. Go ahead. Exactly. Come up to standing and then lower your body down to sit again and then keep repeating that. And do that like 10 times and then have a like a minute break and then try that for another 10 times. And try and do that at least alternate days. And that's going to be a really great way to sort in this keeping that functional movement,

that ability to be able to get in and out of a chair without using your hands. And I was just speaking. as well, to Louise, this, so much focus, I suppose, on fat or trying to get rid of fat, instead of thinking about muscle and increasing muscle. We kind of need to change the mindset, perhaps. Yes, definitely. So it's about retaining muscle,

because we're all going to be losing muscle mass as we get older, if we don't do anything about it. Women, perhaps. Especially, and especially postmenopause. So it's a functional issue. So yes, the focus has very much been. on fat loss for many years, but actually if we think about retention and muscle, everything that we can do to support the retention of muscle, which is the retention of strength, the retention

of function, and the ability to be able to carry on living independently, ultimately. So, yeah, it's actually when we turn our focus to what can I do to support muscle, strength and function, that's going to set us up much better for longevity. I see lots to be getting on with today. Jacqueline Huton is, her book is strong, the definitive guide to active aging. You find her online on Instagram and her garden gym as well. Some great little videos of, you know, Jacqueline lifting up her sofa to vacuum under it, for example. And we had Louise Thomas coming in as well, who has been the senior author of the study that we're talking about this morning.

She's a professor of metabolic imaging, all talking about the shape of your bottom and what it might tell us about diabetes. I hope you're all standing squatting as you listen to us here on Woman's Hour. Messages coming in on phones, well not really phone, social media to be specific. Here's one.

I think the pandemic robbed children of the chance to learn face-to-face interaction and social media adds to that. My daughter is savvy online but I still see the effects social media has on her body image, eating habits and ability to ignore messages

and feel free from the need to be online. I support the balance and so tech companies make social media a safer place. Another totally support the online ban. I've now two 19-year-olds, the battles I have had and continue to have since iPhones were introduced, there are other phones available,

are too depressing and exhausting to relay, get the kids off the phone. But many, of course, also in support of it as we were hearing a little bit earlier. I want to turn next to girls in custody. Earlier this month, the government announced its intentions to transform the system that manages girls, promising to give them

better support to turn their lives around. Girls make up less than 2% of the youth justice population, so young people that are involved in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. And that varies, here are the figures, between 10 and 20

girls in custody at any one time. The government announcement was in response to an independent review that was looking into how the system serves, or at times they would say underserves, underage girls in detention. It was led by Susanna Hancock. She is a board member of the Youth Justice Board. We also have Pipa Goodfellow with us from the charity, the National Children's Bureau, who has been doing research into how we got to this point and also is going to advise

ministers taking these plans forward as part of a newly formed panel. You're both very welcome. Thank you for joining us. Susanna, perhaps I can start with you. Girls in custody. Who are they? Yes. Good morning, everybody. I mean, what we know about girls in custody is, well, first of all, the numbers are very small. When I did my review, there was about 10 girls in custody, I think currently about 18. And the vast majority of them have had very significant experiences of trauma through their lives. So it's interesting this week is the week where we mark violence or elimination of violence against women and girls. But the vast majority of the girls in custody have experienced trauma themselves, either been victims of abuse or domestic abuse. at home or out of home. And when you say in custody, where are they physically? What location? Yes, so there are a small number of custody options for children, but for girls specifically,

I'm interestingly, one of my first recommendations in my review was to stop girls going into Young Offender Institutes. And really pleasingly, that's happened. It happened a couple of weeks after my review was published. So they are no longer in Y-WIs. Okay. All these terminology will be brand new to a lot of our listeners like a Y-O-I. There's so many acronyms when it comes to the justice system. But let us go into these one by one. The girls, you mentioned some of the issues that they have there,

but people might be wondering, what is it that they've done? What are the crimes that they have committed? Yes. I mean, should I briefly say the types of establishments that girls can go into before I talk about the crimes. Let's do that. Young Offenders Institutes are very, very large establishments for around about 700 children, and thankfully, girls don't go into them anymore. Then we have one, what we call a secure training centre, which has about 80 predominantly boys, more vocational, but still very much, you know, some serious offenders in there. And then we have smaller establishments for around about 20 or so children called secure children's homes. And those are the establishments that I think are the best equipped to look after girls.

And who is running, sorry to interrupt you, who is running secure children's homes. Give us an idea what that is because that is what you're pushing for. Yeah. For the most part, they are run by local authorities. So there are a number across England and Wales run by local authorities and staffed by social workers, psychologists, a whole range of, you know, multidisciplinary practitioners who can, I think, are best equipped to look after the needs of boys and girls, but girls specifically. How big might those secure children homes be? How many people might they have? Yeah, around about 20, 25 children in there at any one time. Quite small, homely units.

But mixed gender. Yes, so the vast majority of the mixed gender, there's one which is girls only, but most of them have boys and girls. And interestingly, they have welfare children as well as justice children. So children can be placed there by social services as well as by the justice system. And what we know about girls is that the vast majority of them have been through or are indeed in. the welfare system. So many of them are looked after. And it feels to me to be pretty much chance that they happen to end up in the justice system rather than the welfare. I was surprised by how low the numbers are. I don't know whether our listeners are as well, but as you mentioned, probably 18 that we're talking about. And that would be that percentage and that number of children that are between the ages of 10 and 17 that are in the criminal justice system in England and Wales, to be specific as well. But let me come back to to why they are there?

What sort of crimes are we talking about? So certainly when I was doing my review, the majority of the girls that were in custody were for lower level offending so that there are a smaller number in custody who are there for very serious crimes, need to be in custody, absolutely, to protect the public and protect themselves.

But there were a significant number that were in for lower level offences. And I guess a really good example of a number would be that they were potentially living in children's homes and an incident took place in a children's home involving some violence or some incident. Emergency services police arrived. The girl kicks off against the police. She's then taken to court and it's even more serious because it's a fence against emergency worker. There are no accommodation places for them in the community so they're remanded into custody. And that feels like a very

familiar pattern for girls ending up in remanded into custody when they really don't need to be. So you have spoken to these girls in your review. What did this? tell you? Very, very familiar stories. Stories about how they themselves were victims of domestic abuse or abuse at home. Some had ended up running away. So missing children, I think, are a familiar pattern here. And they end up getting rooted into the justice system rather than the welfare system because they need help to support them through the trauma that they've experienced. And I think the justice system has many girls that fit this criteria. And what they really need is help and support to get them out of the justice system.

And what they're experiencing in very large establishments is that they're retramatized. Do you imagine if you've experienced trauma at the hand of men and then you end up in a custodial establishment that has, you know, 98% boys and that many of the prison staff there are all the custodial staff and men as well, it's just going to serve to re-traumatize them. So just not the right environment for them to be in. What do you think, Pippa, that girls need in a custodial environment? Thanks, Neela. I think one of the things that I'd be really keen to emphasise, actually, is while the numbers of girls, as has been pointed out, is currently very small, that hasn't actually always been the case.

So in the recent past, that hasn't been the case. So in 2002, which really wasn't that long ago, there were 530 girls sentenced to custody in that year. whereas last year it was only 19, so we definitely can't rest on our laurels. And that is fascinating, and I was looking at those figures, and it is a real drop-off since the early 2000s.

Why did that happen, do you think? So there's also been a significant reduction in the number of boys that have entered the youth justice system more broadly and also custody, but that proportion has dropped much more significantly for girls. I think it's really important to say though that that came from there was a significant increase in the number of children entering custody

during the 1990s and early 2000s and that rise was also more significant for girls so what we see is that because the system is set up primarily to deal with boys and because across all of that period of time there has been very little specific policy that's focused on the needs of girls but what we can see is that where you have gender-blind policy, it produces gendered consequences for girls. So what are you looking for? So what we're looking for, I think what's really important is that we also widen the lens that we're looking at this issue within.

So girls in custody, custody is not an island. It sits within a much broader system, as Susanna has already mentioned. So while there are a very small number of girls in custody, there are two, 2,000 girls per year at the moment who were cautioned or sentenced within the system. So we really need to be thinking about what's happening more widely in the youth justice system, as well as what's happening in terms of mental health support, in terms of responding effectively to the sexual exploitation, self-harm, lots of the really traumatic experiences that land girls in the criminal justice system.

We really need to be thinking about those a lot more comprehensively with a focus on really trying to reduce the number of girls to an absolute minute, that end up in this situation in the first place. What happens to girls when they become women? Where do they go? So within the custodial estate, a small number of girls will transition into adult custody, so into the women's prison estate.

Those would tend to be the ones that are serving longer sentences. Many girls will be released into the community when either their period of remand or their sentence is finished. And there's also huge issues there around reintegrating them back into the community and issues around just as there wasn't sufficient provision before they went in. There's also insufficient provision when they leave. And that's particularly when they face that cliff edge of becoming an adult and a lot of those supportive services falling away all at the same time.

Susanna, I mean, it must be difficult to strike the right balance between serving those girls' needs, as you mentioned them, but also for them facing justice for their crimes. Obviously, assaulting, for example, a police officer is a serious offence. Yeah, absolutely. And it's really important. And I think I said this in the front page of my review, that when we think about girls in the justice system,

we think about the victims of the crimes that they've committed and the communities that they come from. And it's so important that this is also at the forefront of our minds. But I think whenever we talk to victims of crime, they say that the most important thing is that this doesn't happen again. And so how we can support, in this case, girls in the youth justice system, to come out of the youth justice system and to stop re-offending.

And interestingly, all the research that people like Pippa and others have done shows that girls offend a lot more serious, a lot less seriously than boys, a lot less frequently than boys, and that they come out of the youth justice system a lot more quickly than boys if they have the right interventions in place. So it feels like we've got a real opportunity to reduce the number much further down.

I read that sometimes facilities, for example, some that you are pushing for when it comes to the secure children's homes, will sometimes refuse a girl. Why? So, I mean, every superior children's home, they take relatively small numbers, so around 20. And if they feel that they either have got capacity or that they haven't got the mix right, so if they've got, let's say, a small number of girls that have very high levels of self-harm, it wouldn't be possible or appropriate for them to take possibly another girl at that time. So that's why one of my recommendations is that the secure children's homes work together as a cluster really so that if one of them isn't able to take a girl, that there's information shared and support given to enable another home to take that girl.

Because the numbers are so small, I genuinely think this is very achievable. Just before I let you go as well, fostering was also mentioned, But I would imagine that that would require, you know, intensive training or a certain special person that is equipped to deal with somebody who has needs like some that you have underlined. Yeah, intensive fostering is definitely an option. And there have been a number, I think, of really helpful pilots. You've evaluated it. The individuals that do it are always incredible. Individuals in our communities, supported to do it and trained to do it.

But it can be very effective in terms of supporting girls and giving. them that small, a trauma-informed environment that they so badly need. And it is an option that can be available to the courts as well. Thank you both for speaking to us about these issues facing these girls, as we said, about 18 at the moment. Zan Hancock and Pippa Goodfellow. We did approach the government about this, the Minister for Youth Justice, Jake Richard said girls in custody are among the most vulnerable children in our society and ending their placement in Young Offenders Institute, as we spoke about, was a huge step to improving their care. We're now going further and transforming the care they receive as part of our plan for

change. We're building a system that recognises the unique needs of girls and gives them the support they deserve to turn their lives around. Now, I just want to read some of the messages. Lots coming in to return to glutes for a moment. I'm 81. I've one session left of an NHS physio course in Plymouth is focused on strengthening hips and knees in people with arthritis. The course has been so helpful. I feel stronger, more alert. And my glutes have definitely. improved. I am glad to hear it. Now, don't miss the latest episode of CBB's Parenting Download. It is the podcast that unpacks the stories that have got parents really talking from viral trends and dilemmas to the news stories that are lighting up your group chats. This week's, the presenter is Katie Thistleton and Governor B. They're digging into the hot topic of sharenting when parents share information, photos, videos about their children on the social media platforms. They're joined by child psychotherapist and cyber trauma expert, Catherine, Nibs and the social media comedy creator Jane Dowden and they discuss what parents should be aware of

and steps they can take when posting about their children online. I don't show my kids' faces on the internet and I haven't done. I probably had about 2,000 followers and I just thought and I didn't have absolutely no idea what the trajectory would be but I had this moment of I don't know if I feel comfortable. Now it's strangers, now it's not my core people, it's people outside of that. I do the back of the head sometimes too Or I use their voice

So I often record their voices And then feed that into the sketch So that you feel like They're part of it But you just don't see them And it is a shame Because they're so cute And sometimes I like

I want to share you with the world But You know To the point now where I have as many followers As I do over Instagram and TikTok I just for me And it's with no judgment to anyone else And for me

I just didn't feel I just didn't feel comfortable It was my choice to put myself out there and share me but it's not their choice. That is the CBB's parenting download.

You can listen to the episode in full on BBC Sounds wherever you get your podcasts and don't forget to subscribe. It's also available to watch on BBC iPlayer just search CBB's Parenting Download. Thanks for all the messages.

Social media continues. My 16-year-old daughter has switched her Instagram account to Spanish so that she can get support in learning Spanish. So everything she now watches is in Spanish. So she's learning. I think they're in favour of it. The Australian ban on social media is just this generation of adults wanting to control teenagers because they don't understand them. I read a biography of Elvis Presley. When he became popular with teenagers, adults tried to ban his concerts. 8444. If you would like

to get in touch. Now, the abstract artist, Bridget Riley's work, spans decades from the 1960s when she became associated with the up-art movement. She also gained international recognition in 1965 when she participated in the responsive eye exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art. It's in New York. And she was awarded the International Prize for

Painting when she represented Great Britain at the Venice Biennale. Bienale. I speak Italian. I should know, right? Bienale in 1968. And now there's a brand new exhibition of her work at the Turner Contemporary in Margate. Well, I'm joined in the studio by the Curator Melissa Blanchflower, who put together that exhibition.

Also, Dr. Francis Fallon, author of the book Embodied Visions, Bridget Riley, Opart and the 60s. And on the line from Margate, we have Dame Tracy Eman. So wonderful to have all three of you with us. I think we need to start with the title, Melissa. Bridget chose it. Learning to see. What does that mean? Exactly.

So I worked very closely with Bridget. We were co-curating the exhibition. So she chose this artist and this title. And it comes from a letter that the French artist Claude Monet wrote to Eugin Boudin later in life. And Eugene was almost a kind of mentor to him. And he thanked Eugène for crediting and encouraging Monet to really look and understand. Eugène really encouraged Monet to start painting on plennair, to paint outside, to paint from nature, to really connect to the colours.

the kind of atmospheric qualities of light outside, which we all know changed modern art as we knew it. Bridgett has a great kind of art historical lineage back to Monet and Sura and this moment in France where artists were starting to paint outside. And we staged this exhibition in Margate, which is very close to the sea, where you can't escape nature, whether or not it's a calm day or a roaring sea, the changing elements of the famous Margate skies. And so this felt like a very apt title in terms of referencing this connection to Monet,

back to nature, and the kind of the staging of this exhibition in Margate. And why don't I turn to Margate for a moment, Tracy? You're very welcome back to the programme. How would you describe Bridget Riley's work for those that are not familiar with it? Most people look at Bridget's work and see like the op art, the fact that it plays tricks with your eyes, it's extremely minimal, it works with colour planes, it works with patterns and repetition. That's how people see it, but actually, I see it very differently.

I see Bridget's work as coded, romantic, deeply personal, and I also see it. It's like a hidden language, and it's her language, and she created it. Not only did she create, like all artists create their own language, but she managed to keep it a mystery. And all people see is the effect that it has on them and the way it makes them feel. And because of that, there's something incredibly alchemic and incredibly magical about it. I'm just a massive fan of Bridget's work. And people don't expect it of me because my work is very emotive and very emotional. And you can see what it is exactly.

But I see the passion behind Bridgett's work. I'm just thinking about that word C, S-E, that it comes up again and again because it is up-art, optical art, it's our eyes, it's then giving us certain emotions, as Tracy has described there. But Francis, you met Bridget 30 years ago when you were studying for your PhD, focusing on Bridget's early works. This is the 1960s really when up-art was coming into its own black-and-white paintings as well. How did you feel?

I found it very interesting right from the start, but I see it very much within its context of the 1960s, which was a period when there was a lot of political change. People were becoming more involved in politics and in public life. So you've got civil rights in America. You've got CND here. And you also have the rise of happenings, where people are going and actually seeing works of art created in front of them

or where the actual experience is the work of art. And they wanted that sort of engagement with art. Now, when you have op-art rising, you get that engagement because when you look at an op-art painting and particularly a really powerful one, like much of Bridget's work, you have an eye-brain reaction. So the work is just, in the case of her work, it was just black and white lines and forms on canvas. But when you look at it, that's not all that you see. You see movement.

In many cases, you see the painting seems to be almost three-dimensional. Almost coming to life, I think, before your very eyes. It is. It is. It occupies the space between you and the canvas. So it's very, and that is. an emotional thing. Let's fast forward. So we're talking about the 60s, right? We're in 2025 now. This exhibition, Melissa, at the Turner Contemporary, also has recent

paintings by Bridget, who is now 94. Ferro is one of them. Can you try and describe that for our listeners? Absolutely. Ferrer is a painting that was made just last year, 2024. And what struck me when I was first met Bridgett and made studio visits was just the kind of the volume of new work that she's been making and also the fact that much of her work or ideas often loops back to previous drawings or previous motifs that we might have occurred, might have seen much more within the kind of early, early moments of her career in the 60s. So Farrow is an incredible, vibrant vertical stripe painting over two metres in height. With colour. With colour, exactly. And a lot of the paintings in the exhibition really explore this relationship to colour.

and it's a painting that she made was sparked based on a drawing that she made in 1983 which we have in the exhibition called Study for Sultan and it's this relationship that dynamic relationship that she has between past and present that for me is in no way any kind of idea around it doesn't really bring any kind of ideas around archival or nostalgic it's using her drawings as these tools as these kind of moments

in order to look forward she looks back and loops around again and so we've got this great relationship between this strike painting which is incredibly vivid it plays with her famous Egyptian palette that she developed in the 1980s and we've got this relationship between drawing and painting within the show and as we think about that we're also talking about

of course going across the decades I know that Bridgett grew up in Cornwall near the seaside and that it influenced particularly her later work. I want to go back to you, Tracy, because if I think at the Turner Contemporary, I just think of the sea that surrounds it. And I'm wondering how Bridget, when we talk about influences,

influenced you. Well, it's going to sound really conceited. Very few, I haven't really, very few artists have ever influenced me. I just deeply admire and respect and learn from them. So my favourite work of Bridgett's is called Martha. And if you go to the Chinati Foundation in Marfa in Texas, which is Donald Judd'sville, really, Donald Judd's World, Bridgett was commissioned to do an amazing work there, which was like these vertical lines, which surround the hole inside of an old military building, and then there's just holes.

And when you look through the holes of the windows, you see the desert outside. And Bridgett's recreated this in Margate, a small version on a corner, which then, reflects out to the sea. The first time I saw it, straight lines of sea, completely flat. Yesterday when I saw it, it was the most ferocious waves and then bands of grey in the sky. So I'd seen this work in Martha and then I see another version of it in Margate and I famously said to Bridget, Margaret, Margaret is my Martha and that's why she dedicated this work, which is

pretty brilliant, but you can't help the coolness of her work. And then the optical illusions of a work, you feel it. And then another artist, which is like Rothko, when you look at Rothko's work, it vibrates and it moves. Bridget invented something even further. It completely moves. Imagine in the 60s coming up with that language and being a woman. And I feel that on the opening on Saturday, on 2 o'clock in the afternoon, there was about 2,000 people outside trying to get in. And it wasn't because there was an opening at Turner.

It was because it was Bridget Riley who created this amazing language. And I think that's what we should really be celebrating right at the moment. Let me turn back to you, Francis. You've also seen the exhibition. Would you like to speak about any of the works that grabbed you? Well, it all did, really. What I think was very interesting,

actually was seeing very early work and work done sort of intermediate period, work's been done much more recently. But if you think about the bolt of colour, the Martha work, that's actually based on a work that Bridget did in the 1980s for a hospital in Liverpool. It's not identical to that. She changed the order of the bands of colour and width and so on. But it's very much based on that. So she's taken things from the past and carried on working with them.

And talk about movement. Although if you look at the very early work, things like Streak, which is on show there, or Cataract. Act one, there's a very, very strong sense of movement and three-dimensionality when you look at those works. But if you look at much later works like Winter Palace or silvered painting, it's much more subtle, these very, very narrow bands of colour. But there is still that feeling of sort of flickering movement within those paintings. It's they're not completely static. Indeed, there is dancing to the music of time, which I believe a big wall drawing made originally for. a museum in Canberra, but then the painted discs change

colour as you move towards them. Tell me a little bit more Melissa about Bridget's background. I mentioned Cornwall very briefly, but she went to Goldsmiths, the Royal College of Art. Exactly. So she had a very traditional art training really in Goldsmiths in the late in the kind of late 1950s where she studied from the old masters, studied drawing, worked from life and observation. And it was a few years later that she started to experiment much more colour and look towards the French impressionist artists and post-impressionists such as Sura.

And it was from that point, and she then developed what we now kind of understand of her as a kind of mature style in the sense of using black and white contrast. So taking Sura from one position of working with our eyes, making our eyes work, making a kind of very active picture plane, to then working with black and white. and really her black and white works really then going through a transition through into greys, which we see in the exhibition to then her introduction to pure colour in 1967.

I was lucky enough to go and see the Turner Constable show last night. I did too. Oh, did you? Well, maybe we would just cross paths, but they were, you know, working. We see their work in their 60s and their 70s. Bridges Riley is 94 as they're creating her art. And I wonder, Tracy, as an artist, evolves and, I suppose, keeps creating new work. Do you understand what drives Bridget?

Yeah, because Bridget's an artist. That's all she lives for. That's her passion. She's never compromised on her life, on her integrity, on her work. She's just a pure art. Bridget is very pure, a pure artist. Also, something a lot of people don't know about Bridgett. she does a hell of a lot for young and up and coming and emerging artist.

She has her studio complex, which she has for artists. She's a very, she loves art and she supports art, which is really important. When I was a student at the Royal College of Art, there was a 150th anniversary of the Royal College of Art. And I had to, I was invigilating, and the paintings I had to invigilate under were Bridget's. Bridget's student work and Bridget's mature work. So I spent two weeks looking at Bridget Riley's work and I think that two weeks was quite light of changing. Because actually, as you mentioned there,

in addition to the artwork when we talk about this exhibition, there's a year-long drawing studio program linked to the show, Melissa. Absolutely. We've got an amazing claw learning studio at Margate at Turner Contemporary which overlooks the sea and for a year, inspired very much by Bridget and the foundational skills that she will talk about from her years in Goldsmiths. foundations of drawing within her practice and the studies that she makes. We've transformed it into a drawing studio.

It will be for 12 months. And it will be for all ages from the tiny toddlers who come to scribblers clubs through to adults. Just very briefly, Francis, where should people start if they've never seen a Bridget Riley? Well, I think that's your start by going to turn a contemporary correctly. Because they will see something from her whole career there. Well, in case they are wondering where it is. Bridget Riley learning to see on now until the 4th of May

how lovely in 2026 at the Turner Contemporary in Margate and you might even be lucky enough to catch a glimpse of the artist Dame Tracy Eman while you're there thank you very much for joining us also to Melissa Blanche Flower who has put together the exhibition

and Dr Francis Fallen author of the book Embodied Visions Bridget Riley Opart thank you so much for all your messages we'll talk about the budget how it affects women tomorrow that'll be Anita Do join us then.

That's all for today's woman's hour. Join us again next time. After Anthony Easton's father passes away, he goes through his dad's old suitcase. It's filled with cryptic clues, neatly stacked German money, a family tree he doesn't recognize, and also finds his father's birth certificate,

but bearing a different name. From BBC Radio 4 in the History podcast, I'm Charlie Northcott, and I've been working with Anthony Easton to understand his family's dark history and how they lost a fortune worth billions today. What happened to his family, their business empire, and all the money? Listen to the House at No. 48 on BBC Sounds.