Woman's Hour - Long Covid, Professor Jo Phoenix tribunal victory, Paying children for chores

Episode Date: January 27, 2024

Hundreds of doctors - led by campaign group Long Covid Doctors for Action - are planning to sue the NHS over claims that inadequate PPE provision has left them with Long Covid. Dr Nathalie MacDermott, joins Emma Barnett to discuss. Do you pay your children to do the chores around the house? The journalist Helen Carroll faced an online backlash after revealing she pays her son £40 a month to load the dishwasher everyday. To navigate the thorny issue, Sue Atkins, Parenting Coach and Author of Parenting Made Easy joins Anita Rani to discuss. In an exclusive interview, Emma speaks to the academic Professor Jo Phoenix who has won an unfair dismissal claim against the Open University after she was compared with “a racist uncle at the Christmas table” because of her gender-critical beliefs. China is experiencing its biggest population drop in six decades. In an attempt to recover from the ‘one-child policy’ introduced in 1980, the government are now urging women to have more children. But a large amount of women in China are saying no – they don’t want children, or to get married. Ty Dr Ye Liu from King’s College London and Cindy Yu, host of the Spectator’s Chinese Whispers podcast, discuss. Rapper Princess Superstar speaks to Emma about finally hitting the big time after a 30-year career in the music industry. Her song, Perfect, features on the soundtrack of the blockbuster film Saltburn. Presenter: Anita Rani Producer: Dianne McGregor

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 Anita Rani and welcome to Woman's Hour from BBC Radio 4. Hello and welcome to Weekend Woman's Hour with me, Anita Rani. Should children be paid to do basic household chores? That's one of the questions we'll be answering today. China is urging women to have more children, but many Chinese women are saying no. We'll be finding out why. Professor Jo Phoenix, who won an unfair dismissal claim against the

Open University for her gender-critical views, speaks exclusively to Woman's Hour. And rapper Princess Superstar on hitting the big time after 30 years in the industry when her song Perfect featured on the soundtrack of the film Saltburn. But first, we know that women are more likely to suffer from long Covid and this week it was reported that hundreds of doctors led by the campaign group Long Covid Doctors for Action are planning to sue the NHS over claims that inadequate PPE provision has left them with the condition. One of them, Dr Natalie McDermott, says COVID has left her with spinal damage. She raised concerns about a lack of PPE during the pandemic and says she was ignored,

while Emma asked her what she knew about how she caught COVID. I know that I caught COVID at work because at the time of the pandemic, I was single and living alone and driving to work. So I had no exposure outside of work. I even had my shopping delivered even pre-pandemic. So I hadn't been to a supermarket even. And I know that the first time I got COVID at work, it was through sharing an office, a very small office, with a colleague who tested positive for COVID the following day. At that time, we weren't permitted to wear masks in our work spaces. We were on the wards, but not in our

office spaces. So that was the first time I got COVID at the end of March of 2020. And I did return to work after that. But at the end of May 2020, whilst working on a COVID ward with inadequate personal protective equipment and only surgical face masks to protect us, I got COVID again. And following that is when I developed the neurological problems I have now. Could you tell us about those before we go back to what you're talking about today and what you're hoping to achieve? So it started with nerve pain in my feet, but it progressed over a number of months. And now it really limits my

ability to walk. I walk with crutches and then only short distances. I need a mobility scooter to move longer distances. And it's also affected my bladder and my bowel. And I have frequent pain in my legs and my feet. And how long have you been dealing with this? Three and a half years. And is that recognised as long COVID? It is recognised as a complication of COVID, yes, maybe a rarer one. We hear different symptoms, about 200 different symptoms for people with long COVID. But yes, it fits within that category, yes. We should say, you know, you're somebody who we heard from sometimes during the pandemic, you were talking about what was going on. You're a virologist with experience in Ebola research. And have you been able to continue working?

I'm one of the fortunate ones who has been able to return to work, but I really struggle to do clinical work now because of the physical demands of that. So I'm largely returned to work, but in a research capacity where I can mostly work from home at times. So that makes it easier for me. You've come together with other doctors, with others working in the healthcare world, where I can mostly work from home at times. So that makes it easier for me. You've come together with other doctors, with others working in the healthcare world to do what? What are you trying to do? We're trying to raise awareness and ask for people to take responsibility

for the decisions that were made during the pandemic. There is an elusive group called the IPC cell or the Infect and control cell, who we believe were part of NHS England, the NHS England pandemic strategy, who made the decisions about the personal protective equipment. And those decisions were that a higher grade of personal protective equipment was not required, even though we did have some evidence to the contrary at the time. And even though a precautionary principle could have been applied to say, actually, we need to give people a higher grade of personal protective

equipment until we know that they don't need it. And as it turns out now, we now know that we did need it. Did you raise that at the time? What were you saying or thinking at that time, especially with your experience? Yes, I did. So I only became aware because I had COVID at the end of March, I only became aware that the PPE guidance had been downgraded in around mid-March of 2020. So I only became aware of that when I returned to work on the COVID ward in April of 2020. And it came as a shock to me that I was now working on a COVID ward, but only permitted to wear a surgical mask. So at that time, I did address it. I raised it with senior colleagues. I sent many emails over five weeks, and I was repeatedly dismissed. I even raised the concern that we know that lots of

viruses have after effects, even if they don't, even if you survive them, you might have ongoing problems following them. And we didn't know what COVID could do yet. And I was still dismissed and told we didn't need a higher grade of PPE. From the COVID inquiry, we've heard about certainly within Downing Street, allegations of female voices being ignored during the pandemic planning, the highest levels of government. Is that a similar feeling in your position? Yes, I feel like I was ignored. I don't know if I was ignored because I was female. I think there were lots of colleagues I know that were raising concerns at the time and being dismissed. And the problem is that no one has

really been held to account for that. No one has taken responsibility. And as yet, despite us now having lots of evidence to show that COVID is spread through the airborne route, the PPE guidance still hasn't changed. So healthcare workers are still being put at risk in NHS hospitals by not being given appropriate PPE for airborne viruses. We went to NHS England for a statement, but we referred to the Department of Health and a Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said, throughout the pandemic, the government acted to save lives and livelihoods, prevent the NHS being overwhelmed and deliver a world-leading vaccine rollout,

which protected millions of lives across the nation. We've always said there are lessons to be learned from the pandemic and we are committed to learning from the COVID-19 inquiry's findings which will play a key role in informing the government's planning and preparations for the future. We will consider all recommendations made to the department in full. But there will be some listening to this, while they have great personal sympathy for you,

Natalie, and some of them will be able to relate. We know many women, in particular with long COVID and symptoms, can relate, very sadly. But they may think, what will be gained from suing and taking this action? Well, I guess the question is that if the Department for Health and Social Care are committed to learning from this situation, why has the PPE guidance still not changed for NHS workers at the moment? Why was it OK for the NHS to make decisions about the PPE guidance for us that put us at risk and knowingly put us at risk? While many will say that they didn't have the evidence, they could have taken a precautionary approach. We wouldn't ask someone, a construction worker, to go onto a construction site with a broken hard hat, would we?

So why is it OK for the NHS to not take responsibility and have a duty of care to its staff to protect them when dealing with an infectious disease that could potentially take their lives? One of the arguments made about the downgrading of the PPE and the not needing a higher grade of PPE was that only 1% of people who got COVID died. Now, I don't think that's a consolation to the families of healthcare workers who died, that they were expendable in the eyes of the NHS and the

government who hadn't adequately prepared with adequate PPE. I appreciate that we had shortages of PPE. I appreciate that difficult decisions had to be made. But it's not okay to lie to your staff and claim that you're protecting them when you're not. And you know that you're not protecting them adequately. Well, could you argue that you didn't know? I mean, you know, what you're saying there is serious. I don't have anybody here to respond specifically, but it isn't just going to be the hospital you spoke about. It's going to be with this case across the NHS. You know, there will be an argument from some of those thinking what they had in place was adequate.

There's a difference between, you know, doing something and knowing and not knowing and now needing to learn. Absolutely. I completely understand that. But I think we knew that the SARS virus was spread through the airborne route. We knew that the MERS virus is spread, particularly in healthcare settings, through aerosolisation of the virus. We knew this virus was spreading on a cruise ship when everyone was isolated in their rooms, or if they went out for daily exercise was wearing a mask. You could draw those conclusions as a scientist and act in the best interest until such time as you had good evidence to suggest you didn't need a higher grade of PPE. I think it was evident to all those who were working in that environment. There was a high likelihood of aerosol spread.

People may say they didn't know. But actually, if you want to look at the scientific evidence the evidence was there. But for those who did know that sort of thing and then there still wasn't a change I mean could you argue we're in the middle of a national emergency that this rather than being by design was on a huge scale and I'm not underestimating what the impact has been was was accidental in some way it was a it was a situation of system over intent. I don't think there was an intent to harm people. I know you did just say about lying and people not taking evidence so I'm trying to put those

two together because that's quite strong words. Yes I don't think there was intent, deliberate intent to harm. But I think there was negligence on the part of people making decisions to not act on the scientific evidence that was in front of them, and to also not choose to follow a precautionary principle and to continue to not follow that principle now. I appreciate that people had to make difficult decisions. I've worked in an Ebola epidemic, I've had to make difficult decisions myself, and I know that things aren't easy. But if you make a decision, and you know that ultimately later on the evidence comes out that it's wrong, then you hold your hands up, you apologise, you say, I'm sorry, I made a mistake. And you correct that. But we haven't corrected that.

What will the correction look like for you? So I know you said about the guidance changing, that could be one. But for this group of doctors in this extraordinary position of suing the NHS, where some of you will still work, apparently, I imagine, and if you can still work, I'll say that as well. Because I should say, you said you were one of the lucky ones. Others are not able to work at the moment. What will that look like for you beyond the guidance being updated? It looks like a change moving forward.

It looks like the NHS acknowledging it has a duty of care to its staff in all facets, not just the exposure to infectious diseases, a duty of care to its staff, that it provides them with adequate protective equipment, that if there were another pandemic that started tomorrow, the decision making would be different. That is what is important to me i can't change what's happened in the past but we can change things moving forward and that's what needs to happen i think also we need to know who the members of the infection prevention and control cell were who made the decision making and we need their minutes published we know who made up

minerv tag we know who made up sage their minutes are in the public domain the only minutes of the ipc cell that are in the public domain are those that have been made available through freedom of information requests. They're few and far between. They're redacted. And we still don't know who membership of that group was. How can we have an open conversation about the decisions that were made if things are still kept hidden? Just finally, thinking of our listeners with long Covid and with those symptoms, do you think that's being taken seriously enough? And I say that again with the knowledge that we know it's, we think it's more women who are in this situation. I think it's being taken more seriously,

but I think there is still a lot of room for improvement within healthcare settings. The problem is we don't know the direct cause and we don't know what treatments to use. So it's very hard to offer people solutions. Dr Natalie McDermott talking to Emma there. Now do you pay your children to do chores around the house? The journalist Helen Carroll wrote in the Times saying she faced an online backlash when she mentioned in passing that she pays her son £40 a month to empty the dishwasher every day which she says works out to £1.33 a day to put away the dishes. So do you pay your children to do chores around the house? Or were you like me and pretty much every other Asian kid growing up in the 80s and 90s, just expected to do chores as a child,

as your contribution to family life and home? Is it ever okay to pay children to do these chores? And if you do, how should you do it? Well, I spoke to parenting coach and author of Parenting Made Easy, Sue Atkins, to get her thoughts. Oh, it's so interesting, isn't it? You know, my mum was the eldest of seven and my grandad would not be paying the kids to make their bed and brush their teeth and, you know, obviously not empty the dishwasher. We're going back a bit. But for me, it is about the we team you know the we family team like Atkins family team so you you know make your bed you put your pajamas underneath

the pillow you put your bowl away when you've had your cereal and I remember when my kids were young they're grown now my son had to empty the bin not one of his favorite things my daughter had to empty the dishwasher then we swapped it around a bit. It's part of responsibility. It's teaching them independence. It's the same thing like with toddlers, you know, put your toys away. It's just what you do to help the family, isn't it? So you didn't pay your children, but why do some parents choose to pay their children to do chores? We had a range of opinions in the office and some do it as an incentive. Yes, but it becomes transactional. Then they go, no, I'm not going to put that opinions in the office and some do it as an incentive. Yes, but it becomes transactional. Then they go, no, I'm not going to put that away in the cupboard

because how much are you going to pay me? Or I'm not going to tidy that up, you know, what are you going to pay me? I can see it. My own daughter wanted to buy a camera, you know, when we didn't have phones sort of thing being so good then. And my car was never so clean because, of course, she wanted to wash the car to get an extra fiver and actually she really looked after that camera and she really took care of you know

making sure she you know had a good time with it because she'd bought into it I think really if you're paying them it means you haven't quite sort of mastered your expectations about why they need to do chores and I think also then it means that the kids see life as sort of transactional and life isn't sort of like that really. So I think you've got to be clear in it why you want to do it, have that chat with them. But a lot of parents want to be their kid's friend and they don't set it up properly really in how they sort of suggest it. So you can start very young. I mean, toddlers toddlers let's face it love to get the hoover out and do a bit of dusting now I'm not suggesting that you're going to make them do those sorts of chores but you can see they want to be part of what you're doing so I think if

you have that conversation with them and you set it out I mean I've got a blog where I put it at ages and stages you know two to three year olds as I I say, put your toys away. Ten year old, you know, make your bed, bring your washing down, tidy your bowl away after cereal, get your school bag. These are all things that teach responsibility and self-discipline. Yeah, it sounds great. But what if they don't listen? What if your ten year old's just like, not going to do it? That's because you're not sort of assertive or you don't what I call mean business. You don't have to wait until it becomes a real problem and you've got resentment and you're angry that you're fussing and going around after them all the time tidying up. But it's getting clear about why you want to do it, being confident in your parenting, having a perhaps a sit down and saying, look, we've got a bit of a problem going on here. I'm running around after you all and I want you to do some jobs. So divvy the jobs out. Don't make it all arduous.

Think of it more as sort of helping out rather than making them. Chat with them and thank them when they do it and make it a light sort of hearted touch. But we are the team and we do do jobs. You know, my husband empties the bin every Tuesday. It's not one of his life's works. He doesn't love doing it, but he does it. You got yourself a keeper there, Sue. You got yourself a keeper. Well, the messages are going berserk. Loads of people want to share their stories on this. So I'm going to read a few of

these out. Everyone in a family should contribute to household chores, respect for others and importantly, respect for oneself and the spaces we share. Someone else says, I shared a house at university with blokes who had clearly never even boiled an egg before, never mind wash a dish. Shame on their mothers and their fathers. I'll just get out the house and find people who know how to clean. Someone else, at 12, I stood each child in front of the washing machine and said, you are entering the adult world.

This device is going to be your friend. From that point, they willingly did their own laundry, including bedding and towels. I gave them the independence, no more, Mum, where's my shirt, trousers, PE kit? They reveled in the agency it gave them, the youngest now 15 and blossoming. Isn't that wonderful? That's self-empowering, isn't it?

Because let's face it, they're so technically savvy, they can work the dishwasher. Well, talking of tech, a lot of the banking apps actively encourage sort of paying your children. What do you make of that? It's a balance, isn't it? Sometimes they put money in, so there's your monthly allowance sort of thing.

And that's the difference. I've written about pocket money. That's slightly different, pocket money to doing chores, because then kids learn to sort of, oh, when it's gone, it's gone. You know, when you give them pocket money in our house, it was really, you know, they ate loads of sweets and bought comics because that's their money to spend it on. As they get older and those apps are great because then you go, well, here's your allowance. And this is what you can spend it on in terms of your lunch at school. So you're very clear about how you want them to be able to spend it.

So they are actually learning about money and money management actually as they get older, aren't they? Izzy says, my eight-year-old daughter created and decorated a table list of chores for the whole family to do each day. I think she could see I was feeling a little overwhelmed by all. She added her job for today as give hugs. Oh Izzy, she sounds adorable. Another message here. I have involved my son who is now four with chores since he first started to walk. He has a sense of pride and responsibility from being depended on to help with household tasks and often he's the one to instigate doing things. So he'll do things automatically like he'll put away his shoes when he gets in from school. He'll hang his coat and hat up,

put his plate and bowl in the dishwasher when he's finished. I'm very much looking forward to when he's bigger and able to help out with the mowing of the lawn. Now, reading that, I've been triggered because I would not have been able to get away with just leaving stuff lying around.

Put your shoes away is just a basic. Yeah. I remember actually when I came home, I was a deputy head for many years and teacher. And I came home, my son had got home earlier, you know, from the school bus. And he was watching the telly with crisp packets everywhere, his shoes and his coat, just, you know, in the sitting room.

And it triggered me because I was exhausted being busy all day. Rather than lose the temper and you lose the relationship, I then sort of thought, well, I need to do something about that. So I did one of these, like, you need to do something about that. So I did one of these like, you need to come and sit down, we need to have a chat. And then you're clear about what you want and then it sort of eases the relationship.

And then he did put his shoes away and all the rest of it. So, you know, I think it can be done nicely. You don't have to shout and yell at it. But I think expectations are important because when you go out in the real world, you know, people are not going to tidy up after you, are they, at work?

Very true. So do you agree then, Sue, we need your opinion on this? You've already talked about parents being assertive, you don't need to be their friends, but what's the balance between the carrot and the stick when it comes to chores? That's a good one, isn't it? If you know your why and if you think,

well, I want to teach them responsibility, independence, being part of a team, And it's good for their self-confidence and their self-esteem because they achieve something and they feel good about that. So if you know your why, then think about how you're going to do it, when you're going to sort of talk to them about it, and then stick to your guns. You know, it's what I call meaning business. It's being an assertive parent, not an angry one, and making sure that you do have to remind them. So I often think, create a poster, stick it up in the kitchen, you do have to remind them. So I often think create a poster, stick it up in the kitchen, because then you can remind them that actually, you know,

your job this week is to empty the bins or whatever you've got to do. Sue Atkins there, enlightening us all. And remember, if there's anything you'd like to discuss on the programme, you can contact us on social media. It's at BBC Woman's Hour, or drop us an email via the Woman's Hour website. Now, Professor of Criminology Jo Phoenix was compared with a racist uncle at the Christmas table because of her gender-critical beliefs and this week won an unfair dismissal claim against the Open University. She was also found to have suffered victimisation, harassment and direct discrimination. Professor Phoenix set up the Gender Critical Research Network at the Open University.

A reminder, if you need it, that gender critical feminists believe sex is biological, immutable and should be prioritised over gender identity. Open University Vice-Chancellor Professor Tim Blackman has said he was disappointed by the judgement and will consider whether to appeal,

but also that the university could learn from the judgement. He said, our priority has been to protect freedom of speech while respecting legal rights and protections. Jo Phoenix gave Woman's Hour her first interview after winning her tribunal. Emma asked her about her win. It's very difficult to even find a single word for what it meant. Let's just say it blew apart any plans I had for the day, completely.

I recognise it's difficult to express how that felt, but you felt you had no choice to take this fight. Is that right? 100%. It's very difficult. I am of a generation of academics who was taught that, at least within our fields, there are no questions that should be off limit, even if those questions might be politically unpalatable for some, that our duty as academics is to pursue those questions, to figure out the answers, to contribute to public debate, to understand policies. So when I saw the effect that Stonewall was having in universities, and we can come to that later if you'd like to, it certainly was one of the contributing factors to what happened to me, I became very worried.

In addition to that, because of my own academic expertise around issues to do with male violence and female victims of it, I thought that actually now is the time that I could speak up. Now I say that Emma, because, and forgive me, I hope this doesn't sound arrogant. I don't like to feel that way. By the time 2018, 2019 rolled round, I'd already had my professorship. I'd had some amazing jobs at wonderful universities. And I was settling into being just a senior professor if you like

and in that position there's very little that a university can take away from you if you're doing something that is like heterodox or out of favor so I thought I amongst others could speak because many of my younger colleagues couldn't. However, what I did not anticipate and what I never thought of was that they could take my name away from me, my mental health away from me, and my good working relations, not just in the Open University, but nationally and internationally. So I suppose on one level, I was a little naive. I don't have a statement from Stonewall, but you can put those concerns out in a moment. And I have interviewed the former chief exec before myself, but on this programme, which people could listen to as well.

But I wanted to come to what actually happened to you, because that's a huge thing to say that they took your name. And you say Open University did that, the culture I imagine around that. You're talking about colleagues. I quoted one of your colleagues. What did happen to you? I'll try and distill it because it's a very long and very sorry tale. In 2019, a conference that was due to take place at the Open University with the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies was cancelled. And at that point, I made it clear to all of my colleagues how much I disagreed with the cancellation of that conference. The conference had been cancelled because the director of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies was accused by several of my

colleagues of being a transphobe for tweeting happy human female day on International Women's Day. And despite what they said to me, I knew that at least, you know, two or three of my colleagues cancelled that conference because of accusations of transphobia. Anyway, I won't go into the details of that. But it was at that moment that I made it very publicly known to my colleagues that I was both gender critical, and that I thought that accusations of transphobia had no place in a university and certainly no place in a university to close down debate. Now around that time I had also signed both of the letters penned by Kathleen Stock, now known as the Stock Letters if you like

in the Guardian and the Times. I had given a talk for an organization called Women's Place UK and various other things. So I was building up, if you like, a corpus of statements, at least, saying that accusations of transphobia were wrong, that, you know, in some circumstances, for some organizations, it's more important to categorise by sex rather than gender identity and that accusations of transphobia function to cancel academics and silence them. People can go and read the judgment, but could you give us a flavour of what happened to you in response? Oh, yeah. Yeah. So, you know, you mentioned I got called the racist uncle at the Christmas dinner table. And I'm very, very pleased to see that vindication and the judgment. One of my colleagues called me in for a talk in the course of that talk.

She made that comment. I was very upset. I was crying. And, you know, that's not something I do at work. So that happened. There was silence within my own department. The things that I did that were successful were hardly ever mentioned, certainly wasn't given praise. But then we get to a very critical moment. So there was all sorts of ostracization, silencing, whispering campaigns, complaints to my dean. Nobody ever faced me with these. This was stuff that went behind. So there was a feeling of hostility, if you like. But then shortly after the Forstater judgment came through, the appeal judgment, myself, John Pike, and a number of others opened the OU

Gender Critical Research Network. And if I were to say to you, the day that we did that was both the proudest moment of my life so far, well, second proudest moment of my life, I'll come to the first one later. But it was also one of the darkest days of my life, because within hours of us launching that, the hostility campaign campaign the public targeted campaigns of hostility just went into hyperdrive my direct colleagues i mean people that i've known and worked with opened an open letter on google docs they published to the world that the open university gender critical network was transphobic several other colleagues from across the university penned other open letters that, to my knowledge, may even still be up on the Open University's

internal websites. And all of these letters said the same thing. Gender critical beliefs and the Gender Critical Research Network is transphobic, that the Open University ought to close it down, that we were contributing to the, in some cases, one of the letters said we were contributing to the murder of trans people. So it was very, very direct. Now, they claimed that it was about the network and not about me, but I was one of the founding members of it. And then, of course, once things got public, there was a Twitter pile on the like of which I've never experienced in my life. And within days around that time period, my memory is very hazy.

I had what can only be described as a post-traumatic break. I lost it, basically. I fell apart. And then shortly after that, I wrote a grievance to the university. I put out my case to the university that all of these complaints about transphobia were vexatious, that they were humiliating and that they were they were not academic freedom, that this was a hostile campaign against me. And the OU, for various reasons, basically took a very, very long time to pursue that grievance. And even to today, there has not been a result of that grievance. Meanwhile, the Open University were making statements on their public website, as well as internally, that they recognised that the OUGCRN had caused harm to the trans and non-binary community. But they actually never, certainly in those early days, they actually never said that gender critical beliefs were protected in law.

And the key tribunal finding, just taking it back to yesterday, is that the Open University did not protect you during this time. Yes. Yeah, there was a failure to protect me. And the failure to protect me in the tribunal finding was because the OU did not want to be seen to be siding with anyone with gender critical views. Now, what's really, really important to this whole judgment and this process is that I was working in an organization that had more or less, you know, kind of, I want to say imbibed, my words aren't very good today, but, you know, had drunk the culture of Stonewall. So it was an organisation in which gender affirmative views were in the majority. So the idea that if you say you are a woman, if you say you are a man, you are those

things, if I could put it in those terms. Yeah, yeah. And you're, I mean, you're ascribing that to the influence of Stonewall and perhaps we'll get to, you know, for those who don't know, the charity that is, of course, famous as well for its work on lesbian and gay rights. Again, hotly contested whether people feel it's still doing that. But we can get to that. You're saying you feel that that culture had been imbibed. Go on. Well, it was one. And, you know, we can debate about the influence of Stonewall, and I'm prepared to bracket that off. What I can say to you was that there was a deeply ingrained culture that self-identity ruled supreme and that any form of gender critical the OU didn't actually back me. And when I say back me, just make simple statements like Joe's gender critical beliefs and those of the OU GCRN are protected. Nothing like that happened. So we were basically, I say we, because, you know, it's not just me, it's the other members of that network, were basically in the eye of a hideous, hideous public targeted campaign.

And the OU failed in its job. And that causes me a great deal of grief because I once loved the OU. Yes, I read that you wished to retire there, and that was where you wanted to carry on your work and keep going. What has and what was the impact on you personally? And it's, again, these are things that hyperbole doesn't even get there. It has been the hardest four to five years of my life, six years. And, you know, anyone who read my witness statement will know I've had quite a background already. But the last, since everything

started in 2019, I've gone, you know, it affected my mental health. As I've said, I've gone to some very dark places. As a professional academic, I occupy a position of doubt. And so for the last several years, I've been like, I think I have a case. I really think I have a case. I think all of this was wrong. But what if I'm wrong? Because, I mean, you felt you had to resign. I just want to make sure we've also put that in the listener's mind and they know that. It should be relatively obvious for the fact you had a tribunal.

We should say that you felt you had to do that. And you also just alluded to having dealt with very difficult things in your past. Are you able to say more about that and how this was in comparison? Yeah, I grew up in Texas. I'm English. My parents emigrated over there. I grew up in Texas. And when I was a teenager, I was raped by two boys, one man, one boy at school. And I took the case through on both of their, I made a complaint to the police and went through the whole criminal justice process as a teenager, I was 15, to then be at a point in my later career where I'm looking at my own employer and saying, please believe me

that these awful things are happening, to be then treated like I was, I mean, it was kind of like insult upon insult upon injury upon deep hurt. Because the thing is, is that a lot of that public campaign, and as the tribunal found, that was conscious. It was targeted. It was widespread. That wasn't by accident. And, you know, my direct colleagues who I worked with knew my history of sexual violence. professionally and personally. The thing I haven't been able to talk about yet is the effect of actually being in that hearing and having a very good KC cross-examine you was perhaps as bad

as the experience at the OU, as the experience in my young life. I said to you earlier that second proudest moment, my first proudest moment was, again, it's a matter of public record. I broke down on the last day that I was being cross-examined and the judge kindly gave me some time to collect myself. I went out. I had a cigarette. I know I shouldn't admit that. I was with my partner and one of my witnesses, Professor Sarah Earl, who's been there with me throughout. They managed to calm me down. The thing I am most proud of was after all of that, I walked back into that hearing knowing that I was going to get another extreme cross-examination. And I was able to sit through three weeks of that. I mean, it's very striking to hear.

You said it very briefly there, but that this experience is even in any way comparable to surviving a rape and the process that followed a rape in terms of the impact it's had on you. Yeah, yeah. Have any of your colleagues been in touch either since you mounted this case uh the ones who accuse you of being transphobic uh or since your your victory i know it was only yesterday since your win have

they ever said you know what i've had to think about this uh calling you a racist uncle through to whatever else was said or written? No, no. You know, and I'm almost 100% convinced that, you know, of the 360 plus people who signed that open letter, they were all people who were at the OU, colleagues, not students. Of all of those people who signed that letter, I can imagine that there's a good percentage that got caught up in a moment, if you like, and just like the mob moment, that probably regret what they did. But there has not

been a single person yet who has apologised for a misplaced tweet, apologised, or even just said, as you said, you know, I've had to think about this, maybe it was a bit wrong. And you stand by the fact that, you know, nothing that you feel you've tweeted or said or done, this is not calling into question yesterday's ruling at all, is anything you should think about again, because tempers are very hot on this in terms of your whole thing is around freedom of speech. I know you care deeply about it. You want to be able to have those arguments freely and without people, you know, not saying what they think. Is there anything that you've reflected on? No, I mean, I would say, and I've said it in the court of law, and I said it to anyone who

will listen to me, I do have a potty mouth. I am known for swearing. So one or two of my tweets have been a little sweary Mary. There's no two ways about it. You know, some of my tweets have been very gallows humor, but certainly in my professional conduct and when I'm actually beginning to talk about the real issues. No, there is nothing. I stand by everything that I have said. And indeed, the tribunal found that, you know, they went through three years of course but but people again may not read the judgment and i think it's important to ask you the question because i'm very struck we've got a lot of messages you know uh reacting to different parts of what you've had to say and many in support i have to say as well but we have a message that's come in here and we don't have time to go through in a lot of detail but i hope you'll come back well no but i hope you'll come back to talk about your area of expertise because it's something we do talk about on the program and i've certainly done many interviews in this area, but it pertains to this, which is this message here, which says, I'm a woman, I'm not young, I'm not LGBTQ plus, and I'm not afraid of trans people. I don't know what you're afraid of. This is directed to you. I don't feel compromised. You seem to like freedom of speech as long as it's yours. Trans is a protected characteristic and should be as they are a vulnerable minority. And I suppose I wanted to give you the chance

to respond to that because I was interested in your research and how it relates, your area of academic expertise relates to your gender critical beliefs around criminology, around where we put prisoners in this country. Very, very happily.

I'm not afraid of trans people. And I strongly you know, I strongly support people's right to identify as they wish. You know, it would be ridiculous for me not to. I'm a lesbian, for goodness sake. And I, you know, was around before the Equality Act. But there's a difference between supporting trans individuals or supporting everyone in their identity and their self-expression and how we organize complex organizations like prisons or like hospitals, for instance. So the thing isn't about being afraid of trans people, and it's not about freedom of speech or not, but we have to be able to ask in the context of prisons, for instance, is a self-identification policy in which male-bodied individuals who identify as women write for the prisons. You know, the prisons is not, you know,

it's not like, I don't know, cinemas. Prisons are very specific places. And we know an awful lot about women in prison. And we know an awful, well, we're beginning to know quite a bit about male people who identify as women. We're beginning to know quite a bit about male people who identify as women. We're beginning to understand a little bit more about their, if you like, I hate using this word because it's a little bit Netflix, about their profile, if you like. We're beginning to understand the sort of backgrounds and index offenses that they have. So in many senses, that whole question about being afraid of trans people, that has nothing to do with it whatsoever. I'm coming from an organizational and policy point of view. And I would never say that in all places, at all times, we ought to organize by sex.

I just say in some places, at some times, it's more important that we understand sex and organised by that rather than gender identity. Professor Jo Phoenix speaking to Emma. Well, Stonewall declined to give us a statement. And Professor Tim Blackman, vice chancellor of the Open University, said, We acknowledge that we can learn from this judgment and are considering the findings very carefully. We're deeply concerned about the well-being of everyone involved in the case and acknowledge the significant impact it has had on Professor Phoenix, the witnesses and many other colleagues. Our priority has been to protect freedom of speech while respecting legal rights and protections. We're disappointed by the judgment and will need time to consider it in detail, including our right to appeal. And remember,

you can enjoy Woman's Hour any hour of the day. If you can't join us live at 10am during the week, all you need to do is subscribe to The Daily Podcast for free via BBC Sounds. Now, until 2016, there was a one-child policy in China. It began in 1980, and there were strict penalties if you broke this rule. Fast forward to today, and China has experienced a population drop for the second year running, with a record low birth rate. It's a problem facing many countries, particularly in the West. Governments have put in place different measures to try and

tackle this. In China, Xi Jinping is putting considerable effort into trying to get women to have more children, including sending texts and public messaging urging women to reproduce. But many women are saying no. Dr Ye Liu is from the Department of International Development at King's College London and Cindy Yu hosts the Spectator's Chinese Whispers podcast. Emma asked Cindy why women aren't having children in China today. I think there are a myriad of factors why women are not really having children in China anymore. One, I think it can't be underestimated, is just how educated women are in China today.

This is going to be some of the most educated generations of Chinese women in probably Chinese history in terms of women in high education, in terms of women in the workplace. And so people are starting to have kind of different ideas of what might make a good life rather than just getting married and having kids by the time you're 25. 10 years ago, the phenomenon of the leftover woman, who was basically someone who was 28 and not married and had kids is now no longer that remarkable because the marriage rate is just getting later and later. The one-child policy, of course, has its impact. As you say, Emma, between the period of 1980 and 2016, the government didn't allow a large section of the population to have one child. There were

exemptions for very many different people, but that definitely depressed the birth rate and sped up what we're seeing in a lot of developed countries or rich developing countries where people are just having fewer babies. But in China, because of its size, because of the one child policy, this problem is now faster. And then the final thing I'll say is just the cost of living as well. In the last 20 years, Chinese housing has become four times more unaffordable. And in the Chinese marriage culture, you know, if a man doesn't have a house, he's going to find it very difficult to find a wife as well. And it's still a very kind of structured society where you only really have children within wedlock, as it were. And so all of these things... So single women, if I may,

single women trying to have fertility treatment or do any of that in China is not the same? Very difficult. As with the UK, there's a postcode lottery in some provinces. In a few provinces, you could have access to IVF, but in most you cannot because they do not want to be that liberal with their marriage values. And that's a problem. Dr. Ye Liu, welcome to the programme. You've been doing research on this and you've also spoken to women who were born during the first few years of the one child policy. What are you hearing? China is not exactly a women friendly and a child friendly place to be.

Similar to other East Asian countries, grabbing with low fertility rates, China had entrenched gender discriminations in the workplace. So my respondents told me they were discriminated against when they were pregnant. They were labelled at diminished capabilities when they were pregnant or with young children. There are also persistent patriarchal culture, gender norms. Women are still expected to look after children, to cover most of the childcare responsibility.

Also, lack of adequate subsidised childcare. But China also has some kind of unique kind of factors. One is about general low trust in the government and in the market in safeguarding children's welfare and wellbeing. So there have been ongoing scandals about, you know, unsafe formula, unsafe nappies, faulty vaccines, sexual abuse in kindergartens, in nurseries. So my respondents ask themselves, why do I want to bring more children in a society where I cannot trust the government, I cannot trust the institution, I cannot trust the very basic safety net for our children.

And also like what Cindy said, we need to ask who are these women? The women, they are actually the children of the one child policy. They had more education than before and they had a strong investment in the particular urban women from their families. And they want to have it all they want to have career and family but being a mother in urban china is not easy this phenomenon we called jiwa mothering so it's quite similar to western country this kind of a helicopter parenting intensive parenting in china do our mothering is all about competition. It's a race of competitive motherhood,

about performing duties, performing motherly practices. Just give you example. So when I have my toddler, I went to Oxfordshire baby groups for support, for moral support. But in China, my respondents went to baby groups for competition, to compete, you know, the baby weight, the baby height.

So one respondent, a two-year-old girl, her height was below 50 percentile. And her mother went through special consultants to design a special diet. She even hired a private basketball coach to design exercise to improve height so everything about competition i mean you've painted a very vivid picture as to why you might not want to do it in the first place from a range of you know the societal issues around you the way you feel about your government and then through to how hard it will be if you're going to do it but the idea of receiving text messages from um from state officials from those getting in touch, tell us about that. And are there any signs of any state encouragement that's working?

Not really. So in China, it's a man making policies for women. So it's really top-down baby demand. And for women's response, a kind of collective resistance to having more babies so um you know it's easy to put a price tag on child cost and we're talking about living cost mortgage and the cost for raising a child but it's impossible to put a you know a price on the cost of women's career opportunity cost and mental you know well. For the women I interviewed, I got in touch with them again about the new policies such as cash rewards and also all this kind of reward system, very ageist and sexist in a way.

So they reward younger women with more money in some provinces to have children earlier. This reward and punishment kind of policy making inherited from the one child policy. It won't work. And for women, it will be kind of collective and shrug to the government baby demand. And Cindy, what's interesting here, and we've talked on the programme before about in China, the complete suspicion of feminism as a foreign force. But it's feminism on a very personal level for these women, which is hard for the state to intervene in.

Yeah, it's the most personal decision you could probably make as a woman with the most long-term repercussions. And while the state can turn off the fertility tap by banning more than one child as it did in the 1980s, what they're finding is that turning on that tab, actually asking women to do something like having more babies when they're not providing the environment to do so, is much, much harder.

And I think what Ye was saying about this government of men for women is very good because women have always been a minority in China's top leadership. But right now, on the Politburo, there is not a single woman at all, let alone in the standing committee. So none of these are people who have personal experience of what women's struggles are. And, you know, I think it's very difficult for them to understand what can change the tide here because they can't see it from that perspective. Well, lots of you got in touch about the idea of being encouraged to have more children. Diana says, from the point of view of the planet,

it's a very good thing that human populations in some places are falling. I have two children. If I were to go back to my childbearing days, nothing any government could do would have persuaded me to have more. For too long, men have been in charge of women's fertility, either by religion or economic pressure. Annabel writes, I have known I didn't want a child since the age of 17. I'm now 50 and absolutely do not regret it and nothing anyone said would ever have convinced me. It's

a very personal decision. So many people have children because it's expected. Many do regret it but can never admit this. And Carrie says, nothing would encourage me to have children. I know my own mind. If I wanted them, I'd have them. I don't enjoy being around them and I'm bored rigid by And now for some music. Congratulations to Princess Superstar. Princess Superstar started her career in the New York rap scene in the 1990s, but it's taken her three decades, eight studio albums, and now featuring on a blockbuster Hollywood film soundtrack to finally get her moment in the spotlight. Her song Perfect, originally released in 2007,

is featured in the film Saltburn starring Rosamund Pike and Carey Mulligan and the track is now back in the UK charts and has debuted on the US Billboard chart for the very first time. Princess Superstar's real name is Conchita Kirshner and she joined Emma this week and Emma started by asking her how it felt to finally have her moment. It's epic. It feels amazing.

I mean, it's so sweet, right? The gratitude is there. It's different than when you get successful in your 30s, which I did. You know, I had Bad Babysitter over there and then Perfect. But there's a sweetness to it that, you know, you were touching on. Yeah, I bet. And also, you know, in an unexpected way for this to come, I imagine. I believe,

what was it like when you were asked if the film could use your music? Well, look, you know, it was the biggest surprise. And the fact that it happened over Christmas was like really fun, too. It was like the best Christmas gift. But when they asked me, I was like, oh, yeah, sure. And like, I don't know, being like American, I didn't really recognize the name except for the names on the sheet, you know, where they say who's going to be in the movie. I recognize Richard Grant. But other than that, I didn't recognize the names. And I was like, yeah, yeah. Like people ask me to use this song all the time. So, you know, it wasn't like anything special. But there you go. It was and it has been. And it's like life changing. Yeah. How is it life changing? What does that mean in your world? I actually never stopped making music. I kept putting it out, but nobody listened to it. It's sort of like my career sort of just like went down after the two hits, you know. But I kept going anyway because I had to, because it was my passion. But it was pretty painful where, you know, you'd put something out and nobody would listen to it or your numbers would be so low and you'd be like,

oh my gosh, especially when you had had success and you know what it's supposed to be. But what I'm finding is happening now is basically my career being handed back to me, like everything from managers, lawyers, booking agents, publishing deals, record deals. I mean, it is like in a snap, my whole career came back to me. But because I never stopped doing my passion, I was ready. You know, they say that success is when luck meets preparation. And I was prepared. I wasn't just like lying around feeling sorry for myself. Although I did have those moments. I was gonna say, it must be pretty hard when you put something out in the world and you see few have engaged with it. And that's not the hope. Yeah, it is hard. But it's like, you know, if anything, I'd love to be an inspiration to people to just keep doing their passion, keep doing what they love, like, and

who cares? Maybe three people, maybe 3 million will listen to it or see it or whatever. But there is a backstory here, because I understand you weren't happy with how the song was originally promoted. Yeah, that was kind of, I think, part of why I kind of lost my career in a way is because the record label Ministry of Sound, you know, they made this video without me. They cast it with models and in the contract I had had creative control. But instead they put these like three models lip syncing to my song. And not only did they do that, but they sent the three models on tour as Princess Superstar. Like it was just like a real shady dance music era where they would just do crazy stuff like that. So people knew me from Bad Babysitter, but then they didn't actually know that I was the one that sang perfect. There was like a disconnect right in the branding as an artist. So that was kind of one that sang perfect, there was like a disconnect, right, in the branding as an artist.

So that was kind of devastating. But look, 17 years later, I get to tell my story on TikTok and Instagram and everything. That didn't exist then. No, it didn't. I mean, we approached Sony, who now run Ministry of Sound Records.

We haven't had a response on that. But I suspect having yourself not in the music video and having been written out of that in some ways, this might make this success even sweeter. Oh, 100% because it's like, it's kind of like healing where I can like, oh, I can tell my story now. What was interesting, even though I've been going for 30 years, I've never actually been on the US Billboard charts, never. And here I am age, on the US Billboard charts, you know, as a woman, which is like even more amazing. Well, yeah, a woman in your 50s rapping, there aren't that many women who occupy that space. Yeah, I don't think there are any unless they're lying, you know,

I like to just tell the truth. And, you know, as a white woman coming to rap, has that been an interesting journey? Oh, for sure. I mean, especially I started in the 90s where nobody was doing it. Right. But I don't want to be like, oh, I'm white and hip hop. Like, you know, it's not a good look, but it was hard. I mean, for me, I just wanted to do it because there were ways that you could express yourself with hip hop that you can't do when you're singing. And I love words. You know, I always just love words. And so that's why I went into it.

And the love of hip hop, obviously. So I just fought that uphill battle for sure, because I wasn't really taken seriously, as you can imagine. But again, I'm very grateful for my whole career. You know, even the downs, right? Because that leads to gratitude. Now. And Saltburn, have you seen it? Yeah. Where are you? It's become quite the debate. I mean, I thought it was like brilliantly written. And I think, you know, some of the like sexy scenes, I was like, Oh, my God, oh, my God, what, what? And I'm, you know, everyone knows

me, bad babysitter. I'm pretty cheeky, you know, like I was shocked. But I guess the one thing is, is that I don't really like like celebrating murder. But otherwise I thought it was brilliantly done. Well, not too many spoilers in there, but I suppose you're speaking to the debate around what people felt. But your music is at the heart of one of the brilliant scenes in it. Princess Superstar, congratulations. We'll put it like that and enjoy this moment. And I hope there are more to come for you.

Yeah, thank you so much. Good honour. Princess Superstar there. Real name Conchita Kirshner speaking to Emma. It's never too late. That's all from me. Don't forget to join Emma from Monday morning at 10am where she'll be discussing all things cute. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. 30 years ago, Britain's farms were hit by an epidemic

of an infectious brain disorder. They called it mad cow disease. I'm Lucy Proctor and in The Cows Are Mad from BBC Radio 4, I tell the story of a very weird time in our history. The media started calling me the mad cow professor. Mad cow disease rampaged through Britain, first killing cows and then humans. And the thing is, after all this time, nobody knows for sure where mad cow disease originally came from.

The general feeling is that we will never know the answer. Subscribe to The Cows Are Mad on BBC Sounds. 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.