Woman's Hour - Mississippi abortion law at the Supreme Court; Poet Kim Moore; England women's football win

Episode Date: December 1, 2021

The US Supreme Court is set to hear a case on a Mississippi abortion law, which would ban abortion at 15 weeks of pregnancy. It was signed in 2018 by the state's then Republican Governor, Phil Bryant. But it was blocked by several lower courts, so didn't come into effect. Now, Mississippi is asking the Supreme Court to rule in favour of their law and overturn the landmark case of Roe v Wade, which legalised abortion nationwide. Our reporter Melanie Abbott spoke to Jenny Ma, Senior Staff Attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which represents the last abortion clinic in Mississippi and Amanda Taub, a reporter for the New York Times, joins Chloe live.Many of us have probably scribbled a poem to past lovers, but imagine writing a whole book dedicated to them. The poet Kim Moore has done just that with her new collection All the Men I Never Married. She joins Chloe to talk about the impact of those different relationships and the contradictions and complexities of desire. Last Saturday while talking to football fans outside the Castellani stadium in Empoli after a Serie A match, Greta Beccaglia, an Italian journalist with Toscana TV, was assaulted live on air. A fan appeared to spit in his hand before slapping the journalist on her bottom. Beccaglia has since filed charges after police managed to identify the man. Investigative journalist, Alessia Cerantola joins Chloe Tilley to explain why this story has caused such a stir in Italy.Last night in their World Cup 2023 qualifier the Lionesses - England Women's football team - beat their opponents Latvia 20-0. Whilst a great win, and one that saw Manchester City's Ellen White become the top scorer ever for England, what does that score line actually tell us about the structure of the women's game - are such results a failing of trying to mimic the way men's football is organised and does it need overhauling? Chloe speaks to BBC Women's Sport reporter Jo Currie.

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 Chloe Tilley. Welcome to Woman's Air from BBC Radio 4. Good morning. Welcome to the programme. Good to have you with us. Now, we're going to be hearing from the US shortly where the Supreme Court is set to rule on whether to ban abortion in one state after 15 weeks. The ruling could have implications across the whole country. Poet Kim Moore is going to join us to talk about her collection of poems about men she had relationships with but never married. And this morning, I want to hear from you about the ones who got away, those you admired from afar, but yours or their situation never allowed it to become more,

those you were in a relationship with, but it didn't go the distance. You can text me now on 84844. Text will be charged at your standard message rate. On social media, you can get in touch. It's at BBC Woman's Hour, or of course you can email us through our website. I in fact remember making a pact at school with a boy in my year who I had liked for years, that if neither of us were married by the time we were 30,

we'd get together. It obviously didn't happen, but I want to hear your stories this morning you can text me 84844 now football is also bubbling through our program today we'll be celebrating the incredible england women's result against latvia in their world cup qualifier 20 nil yes you heard that right ellen white becomes england's all-time top scorer in the women's game. And we're going to look at how the game has improved in recent years and also at calls for pre-qualifiers as a way to address that huge gulf between some teams. And we're also going to hear about the TV journalist who had her bottom slapped live on air whilst interviewing football fans post-match in Italy. We're going to look at how typical it is of male behaviour towards women in that country. But let's begin in the US because today the Supreme Court will hear arguments on a Mississippi abortion law which would ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy except for

some medical emergencies or severe fetal abnormality. Now, the right to an abortion has for decades been a controversial and fiercely divisive issue in the country. But in recent months, tensions have reached a new high in two states in particular, in Mississippi and in Texas. Well, today's case, many say, is momentous and could shape the future of American abortion rights. Mississippi's proposed law was signed back in 2018 by the state's then Republican Governor Phil Bryant, but the law was blocked by several lower courts, so it didn't come into effect. Now the state of Mississippi is petitioning the Supreme Court to rule in favour of its law and overturn that landmark case from 1973 of Roe versus Wade,

which legalised abortion nationwide. Well, the former U.S. Vice President Mike Pence spoke in Washington yesterday ahead of the hearing. I came here today to speak about right and wrong, to say life is a human right and urge the Supreme Court of the United States to choose life. As we stand here today, we may well be on the verge of an era when the Supreme Court sends Roe versus Wade to the ash heap of history where it belongs. Well, let's speak now to Amanda Taub, who's a reporter for The New York Times, to look at this case and what it means across America. Good morning, Amanda. Good morning.

So let's begin by talking about the law currently in Mississippi. Just explain that to us. So right now in Mississippi, as in the rest of the United States, with the possible exception of Texas, as I'll get to in a moment, the law is Roe v. Wade, which says that in effect, women have the right to, women and other pregnant people have the right to seek an abortion until the fetus becomes viable, meaning that it's able to live outside of the womb. That has been settled law with some tinkering around the edges for decades in the United States. But this Mississippi law is a very square challenge to Roe versus Wade and presents an opportunity for the court to do anything from upholding the legal standard to tightening it, limiting it, to overturning it entirely.

And so many people will look at this, they may well remember how President Trump nominated three justices to the Supreme Court during his tenure. And that really swung the views of the judges towards a more conservative nature. Is a lot of this to do with how the Supreme Court is now made up? Definitely. So there have been very regular legal challenges to abortion law in the United States, effectively, ever since Roe v. Wade was decided. This is something that comes before the court every few years. But the reason why this case is seen as a particularly significant turning point is because of those conservative justices appointed by President Trump, which have really swung the court to the right. And many people assume that

that means it will swing it towards the pro-life anti-abortion position. So let's talk about the sort of two positions, if you like. Pro-choice, how are people who support pro-choice feeling about this? Are they very worried that the opportunity for women to have abortion will be potentially taken away across the country? Definitely. I think that there is a lot of concern. I would say that for many activists, they believe that that right is actually already gone because the court refused to stop the implementation of Texas's abortion ban a few months ago. Normally, when there is an abortion ban, as you mentioned, in the case of Mississippi, it's stayed for a couple of years while legal challenges go through the courts and filter all their way all the way up. The Texas law was specifically designed to prevent that happening

by turning it into a kind of a private right of action where one individual citizen can sue another. But when the Supreme Court refused to stay the implementation of that law several months ago, many activists who support abortion rights saw that as, in effect, the end of Roe v. Wade. But there are still many other people who believe that this case, because it more squarely presents the issue of the Roe standard and whether it should continue in its current form to this very conservative court, they're expecting that this could be the case that really kind of shapes the future of abortion rights under law in the United States. So for pro-life groups, this is potentially a momentous occasion. Yes. So for anti-abortion activists who obviously oppose Roe v. Wade and have been bringing cases through the courts in the United States for decades to try to get that standard overturned. This appears to be the case that would have the strongest likelihood of, you know, bringing them to that goal. So I

think that there is a lot of excitement about that. And certainly, you know, I think if you look at things like the court's refusal to issue a stay in the in the other Texas case, I can understand why they feel that way. I would say that there have been some cases in the past that conservative pro-life activists also expected to be the time when Roe would fall. And it has not happened. So I think this is one of those things where you have to wait for the actual decision to know what it's going to say. I've got a quote here from Amy Coney Barrett, which people may well recognise that name. She was one of the three justices who President Trump nominated. And she was the person who effectively swung the Supreme Court to a more conservative standing. She was asked about this back in 2016. She said, I don't think that the court case that women have a right to abortion, I don't think that will change. But I think the

question of whether people can have very late term abortions and how many restrictions can be put on clinics, I think that would change. So it's an insight into some of the thinking, at least, of the Supreme Court justices. And what are we thinking timeline wise? How long is it likely to be before we know the ruling on this case? It's impossible to know there isn't a set timeline when the justices issue decisions within their term. But in general, the more kind of controversial and high profile a decision, the later it comes out in their term. But in general, the more kind of controversial and high profile a decision, the later it comes out in their term. So I would expect this to be one that is one of the last court opinions to come out from the cases heard this term. And I would just comment on the Amy Coney Barrett quote that you just mentioned to give it some context. There is a pretty strong culture in

the United States of justices avoiding being pinned down one way or another precisely on issues that are likely to come before the court before they get confirmed. Amy Coney Barrett has been on short lists for the Supreme Court for a very long time before she was actually nominated and confirmed. So, you know, there's always a kind of long process of trying to signal without specifically stating what a position is. And she has done that in both directions. So she has made statements like the one that you just mentioned. She has also signed on to things like, you know, advertisements in newspapers calling abortion, calling saying that life begins at fertilization. And that I think she one of the ads referred to abortion as a as a barbaric practice called the legacy of Roe v. Wade, a barbaric legacy. And so in both of those cases, I think you would say that those were not a direct statement by her of how she plans to rule on this case. And they can

be interpreted in different directions, which is something that's very standard for justices before they're confirmed to the Supreme Court. And one of the reasons why there's so much kind of tea leaf reading about their judicial backgrounds and personal religious beliefs and things like that. Amanda, do stay with us because I want to play you and our listeners an interview with Jenny Ma. Now, she is a senior staff attorney at the Centre for Reproductive Rights,

which is representing Jackson Women's Health Organisation. That is the only abortion provider left in Mississippi, and they're being represented in this Supreme Court case. She told our reporter, Melanie Abbott, how other states could be affected by this ruling. You can imagine if you look at a map of the United States, that many states in the South, in the middle of the country, are poised to ban abortion. There are 12 states that currently have laws called trigger laws, which will jump into place if the Supreme Court overturns Roe in whole or in part. And then we have done an analysis where about 24 states, so about half of the United States, are poised to restrict or ban abortion

entirely. So we are really creating the potential for two different Americas where, you know, your access to care will depend on which state you live in. And that seems untenable. A lot is resting on this then. This is the biggest moment in this area of reproductive rights and abortion care in the United States in decades, and indeed since 1972. For listeners who might not be familiar with it, what is the process? How do we get to this point where it's going to the Supreme Court? Perhaps some of your listeners might know the Supreme Court does not take many cases. Many parties ask the Supreme Court to take cases, but they do not. And it's a very small amount of cases that the

court takes. This case was rather unusual. As I've said, Roe versus Wade has been the law of the land. Lower courts, so appellate courts and trial courts in the United States had no trouble understanding this. So although some states tried to pass these laws that would ban abortion prior to viability, every single court knew what to do and struck down those laws as unconstitutional. These bans, again, are unconstitutional prior to viability. So when Mississippi asked the Supreme Court to look at this law, I will admit many people at my organization, as well as overall in the reproductive rights movement, did not think that the court was going to take this case. And the Supreme Court sat on this case for almost a year. And then when we heard that the

court was going to take this case, you know, as I said, it was a pivotal moment in reproductive rights and reproductive rights litigation. We do already, though, have the outlier state, if you like, of Texas, which has overturned this law to some extent. Although it's not the state that enforces it, it's down to individuals to enforce it. That's correct. In terms of just the kinds of restrictions that have been put into place, Texas is a prime example. It is indeed a market leader in terms of these abortion restrictions and bans. And we are seeing just the chaos and fear and heartache in Texas. And it's not just retained within those states' borders. We are just hearing from our providers and patients alike

about what's happening in neighboring states and sometimes as far away as Maine, which is on the other half of the country. And Texas deputized its citizens across the United States to really become vigilantes in enforcing this unconstitutional law. Some people have described them as bounty hunters. Exactly correct. I mean, to give a $10,000 benefit is quite remarkable. So that case really is about whether or not states can delegate to the public to enforce a law and to avoid any responsibility in the federal courts. And that's just not how constitutional rights works in this country, or at least I hope that's not how constitutional rights works in this country.

We are still waiting for a decision by the Supreme Court on that case. But really, in that state, yes, Roe versus Wade has been effectively overturned. And we've seen a fraction of the chaos, heartbreak that that's led to. And that's been going on for three months, which I find quite remarkable and unexcusable. What do you think it will mean for women in the US then if Mississippi is successful in reducing the limit to 15 weeks? I think the outcomes would be devastating for women in the United States. Because again, the law is not just going to be restricted to Mississippi. And if the viability line is to disappear, then there's no stopping point.

Mississippi has a six-week ban in place as well, as well as a trigger ban. So oftentimes these states have a 15-week, well, if not 15 weeks, then six weeks, and if not six weeks, then zero weeks. So it could reduce it to six weeks. They have a law in the books that we've managed to stop during litigation, but that's working itself through as well. So there's no stopping point. And as I mentioned, there's about 24 states poised to restrict or ban abortion entirely. So what it will mean for women in the United States is that if you are a person of means and you are wealthy enough to be able to fly out of state or travel out of state, and if you have the money to put yourself

up in a hotel, because many of these states also have waiting periods, you know, 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, where you have to wait to access health care, along with a host of other restrictions, right? If you are able to pay your way through that and get time off care and have someone take care of your existing children and be able to go through all of those hurdles, then you will be able to access abortion care in the United States. But that is not the status of most people who access abortion in this country. 75% of those accessing abortion are poor or low income in the United States. Many of them are women of color. These are folks who cannot take time off or afford to take time off or get paid time off. They cannot fly to another state.

Oftentimes we hear from our providers that people cannot even have transportation or gas fare enough to make it, so let alone flying or a hotel fee and so on. So we will really create already. There is folks with means and folks without and a great equity problem in this country financially as well as racially. But this will only exacerbate it if Mississippi is successful in upholding its ban. The Mississippi Attorney General has told us the abortion laws are outdated because science has moved forward. Babies can survive from a much earlier stage. In a statement, the Attorney General Lynn Fitch said at 15 weeks, the baby's fully taken on human form. It can smile and hiccup and is likely sensitive to pain. And the viability line has

moved from 28 weeks to 22 weeks. What do you say to that? That is absolutely incorrect. If you look at the medical organizations that have weighed in on this case, every reputable medical organization, including those in the United States, as well as internationally, really speak about this issue. And the viability line has not changed in decades. That is a steadfast line at 24 weeks. Those imageries of the fetus, that does not overwhelm the woman's liberty right in order to access this right. I think one look at all of the amicus briefs, which are supportive briefs on both sides, can absolutely show that that is not correct. And the attorney general is just incorrect about that. She also says that things have improved for women now. There's better access to contraception,

better childcare provision and parental leave. And if the pregnancy is unwanted, she says the baby will be cared for by the state until it can be adopted. What do you make of those arguments? Mississippi has some of the highest poverty rates in the United States. It has some of the highest percentage of black folks in the country. And the majority of people seeking abortion care in the state are black. Mississippi suffers from some of the worst maternal mortality rates and infant mortality rates in this country overall. And Mississippi has repeatedly failed to address those poor maternal

and infant health outcomes. So I think the state's focus is incorrect and ignores the great tolls that pregnancy has on women in that state as well as across the United States. Well, that was Jenny Marr from the Centre for Reproductive Rights talking to our reporter, Melanie Abbott. Amanda Taub from the New York Times is still with me. Amanda, let's just pick up on some of the issues that were raised in that. The Texas law that Jenny mentioned, this idea of this so-called bounty hunting scheme. Give us a sense, a bit more information about that and how that is different, that law is different to this Mississippi one or indeed any others that came before it. The Texas law

has an unusual structure in that rather than giving the state the right to bring a criminal case or even a civil case against somebody for providing an abortion or seeking an abortion, what it does is it gives private citizens a right to sue doctors for large amounts of money if they believe that they have provided an abortion or helped someone to get one. And it's not limited, I should say, to doctors. It could be, you know, another person could be targeted for that kind of so-called bounty as well. And this was done in order to avoid judicial review, in order to say that the courts can't review the law and therefore can't stay its application until there is a live case. And so it's basically an attempt to use the structure of American courts and judicial procedure to create a loophole in Roe v. Wade. um it has been somewhat successful in doing so um because it um has bounced around a bit in the lower courts but the supreme court did refuse to issue a statement your line's a bit

scratchy amanda but we're gonna we're gonna we're gonna stay with you if we can but that can you hear me Amanda can you hear me and would have implications that go very far beyond abortion so the Supreme Court had a oral argument last month in that case and the justices seemed very concerned about questions like well could this type of bounty law be used to limit gun rights or religious rights freedom of speech that sort of thing certainly different direction amanda i think we are struggling a little bit with lines i don't know if you can still hear me or not can you hear me amanda i can hear you fantastic you're bouncing in and out um but we i just want to raise one point with you.

And then we may have to bring it to a close just because of the scratchy nature of the line. But I want to raise the point that we heard there about the Mississippi Attorney General saying that science has improved dramatically since 1973 when Roe versus Wade was decided upon. There's a lot more information available about fetal development and And of course, women's opportunities in life have changed. It's not a situation where now you have to choose between having a family or having a career. You can have a baby, you can still go out and earn money, you can still have support. And that is one of the main focuses that the people in Mississippi are focusing on who want to get this change in the law. That would suggest that the line has given up to Amanda, which is unfortunate. But we got the gist of what Amanda was saying there.

And it is important to say that one of the main thrusts of the argument from the attorney general in Mississippi, as we heard that in that report, Mel was putting there as well, is that babies at 15 weeks, they say, has fully taken on paternity leave are in place. There is more support for women to be able to go ahead with their pregnancies. Now, are you a step mum, tired of being typecast as the wicked one or coping with children who are testing you? Then you might be interested in a new podcast that was launched on BBC Sounds last week. It is called You're Not My Mum, The Stepmum's Side. And it's hosted by Katie Harrison. Now, she's going to be joining us tomorrow to talk about some of the complexities and, of course, the realities of being a modern stepmother. She'll be alongside Susie Heyman, who is a counsellor and spokesperson for the parenting charity Family Lives.

But we really want to hear from you, hear your experiences, your stories, or helping you indeed with any problems that you might be facing right now. So email us through the website, or of course, you can text us your experiences. The number is 84844. Text will be charged at your standard message rate on social media. It's at BBC Women's Hour, or as I said, you can email us through our website. Now, many of us have probably scribbled a poem to past boyfriends or lovers but imagine writing a whole book of poems dedicated to them. Well the poet Kim Moore has done just that with her new collection All the Men I Never Married and she joins me now to talk about the contradictions and the complexities of desire.

Good morning Kim. Hi. So what made you come up with the idea of putting this all together as a collection and putting it in a book? It's my second book. So after the first book, I was sitting feeling like I was never going to write another poem again. And so it started really as a a joke I thought I'll just write a poem that's a list of all the all of my ex-boyfriends so it was really kind of a way of poking fun at myself and then I started to think after I wrote that poem I thought I should write a poem for each of them but then that I didn't quite manage that because I I quickly worked out that some ex-boyfriends didn't really deserve a whole poem. But then it kind of expanded and I thought any poem with a man in could be in All the Men I Never Married.

So it got a bit out of control, probably how it happened. Now, I know that you're going to read us a poem and the first one you're going to read to us. Well, it's a kind of list of those men, isn't it? Can we have a listen? Yeah. So this is All the Men I never married number one there was the boy I met on the park who tasted of humbugs and wore a mustard yellow jumper and the kickboxer with beautiful long brown hair that he tied with a band at the nape of his neck and the one who had a constant ear infection so I always sat on his left and the guy who worked in an office and could only afford to fill up his car with two pounds worth of petrol and the trumpet player I loved from the moment I saw him dancing to the Rolling Stones and the guy

who smoked weed and got more and more paranoid whose fingers flickered and danced when he talked, and the one whose eyes were two pieces of winter sky, and a music producer, long-legged and full of opinions, and more trumpet players, one who was too short and not him, one who was too thin and not him. Are you judging me yet? Are you surprised? Let me tell you of the ones I never kissed, or who never kissed me, the trombonist I went drinking with, how we lay twice a week in each other's beds, like two unlit candles. We were not for each other, and in this we were wise. We were only moving through the world together for a time. There was a double bassist who stood behind me, and angled the body of his bass into mine and shadowed my hands on its neck and all I could feel was heat from his skin and the lightest breath and even this

might have been imagined. I want to say to them now that all we are to each other is ghosts, once you were all that I thought of. When I whisper your names, it isn't a curse or a spell or a blessing. I'm not mourning your passing or calling you here. This is something harder, like walking alone in the dusk and the leaves. This is the naming of trees. This is a series of flames. This is watching you all disappear. Kim, thank you. When I listen to that, I mean, it kind of takes me back and makes me think about, you know, past loves and relationships. When you read these, well, particularly that poem at Poetry Readings, is that the kind of reaction you get?

What do people say? Yeah, I've had some interesting reactions. So definitely that, that women come up and say, oh, it's reminded me of such and such person. But the first time I read it was at um the Grange over Sands luncheon club which is a glamorous a glamorous event and um when I got to the line are you surprised are you judging me yet an elderly woman looked up from her soup and shouted yes um so that was kind of um fun I thought it was funny but it was also it's quite disconcerting to to kind of fun. I thought it was funny, but it was also,

it's quite disconcerting to kind of get heckled halfway through. I then read it at Huddersfield University as part of a lecture series. And I told that story and someone in the audience put their hands up and said, what would your reaction be if at that moment in the poem, are you surprised, are you judging me yet? Someone shouted no. And I started to realise then that actually the first person that's judging me for that list is myself

because of the use of the word yet. Are you judging me yet? I'm judging myself and kind of inviting the audience to join in with that almost. So, yeah, so I then started to think about how often like moments of sexism and kind of cross over with with desire when women talk about past past boyfriends or and how we judge ourselves as you say yeah how we're kind of complicit in it as well we've been getting lots of messages coming in this morning we've been asking people to get in

touch to talk about the ones that got away. And we've had some lovely messages. One here saying, we can look back on past relationships with rose-coloured glasses. However, it didn't work out for a reason. Best to look forward. That's from Angelique Rose in Edinburgh. Thank you, Angelique. I was talking at the beginning of the programme how I had a pact with a boy at school

who I really fancied for years. That if we hadn't married by the time we were both 30, then we would marry each other. And Helena on Twitter says, I also had a pact with a former school friend that we would marry if we reached 30 without marrying anyone else. We married other people, but we're still friends. Keep those coming, 84844.

Now, I know that you're going to read us another poem now, Kim. And this is, I guess it's about kind of an early experience of feeling desired, those kind of strange teenage years, aren't they, I guess. Would you read that to us? Yeah, so I suppose this one is more, there's other poems in the book which are exploring moments of sexism.

So moments that are kind of got nothing at the heart. So they're things that stay with us. Probably I'll remember this for the rest of my life, but I didn't quite remember. I didn't understand why i remembered it so i wanted to write a poem um to see what happens when you put the white space of a poem around an experience of of sexism um so this isn't this isn't a boyfriend um ex-boyfriend poem this is is All the Men I Never Married, number seven. Imagine you're me, you're 15, the summer of 95, and you're following your sister onto the log flume, where you'll sit between the legs of a stranger.

At the bottom of the drop, when you've screamed and been splashed by the water, when you're about to stand up, clamber out, the man behind reaches forward and with the back of his knuckle brushes a drop of water from your thigh. To be touched like that for the first time. And you are not innocent. You're 15. Something in you likes that you were chosen. It feels like power, though you were only the one who was touched, who was acted upon. To realise that someone can touch you without asking, without speaking, without knowing your name, without anybody seeing. You pretend that nothing has happened. You turn it to nothing. You learn that nothing is necessary armour you must carry with you. It was nothing. You must have imagined it. To be touched and your parents waiting at the exit and smiling as you come out of the dark and the moment being hardly worth telling.

What am I saying? You're 15 and he is a man. Imagine being him on that rare day of summer. The bulge of car keys makes it difficult to sit, so he gives them to a bored attendant who chucks them in a box marked property. A girl balanced in the boat with hair to her waist, and he's close enough to smell the cream lifting in waves from her skin, her legs stretched out. And why should he tell himself no, hold himself back? He reaches forward, brushes her thigh with a knuckle, then gets up to go, rocking the boat as he leaves. You don't remember his face

or his clothes, just the drop of water, perfectly formed on your thigh before it's lifted up and away by his finger. You remember this lesson your whole life, that sliver, shiver of time, that moment in the sun. What am I saying? Nothing. Nothing happened. Was that difficult to write? No, I think that's, well, it was,

I suppose it was difficult in that a poem is difficult to kind of construct. But going back to that memory, that memory didn't traumatise me or make me scared of going anywhere on my own. But it kind of stuck in my mind for a long time. And I had to write the poem to understand why it was sticking in my mind. And really, it's about learning at a very young age that your body, as a a young woman can feel like public property sometimes that those things can happen and and there's nothing you feel like there's nothing you can do about it so I'd never told anyone until I wrote the poem um I actually had a conversation with my twin sister when the book came out and she read that poem and she said I did see but I didn't I didn't say anything so I've spent all these years thinking that nobody knew and nobody saw.

And it was this kind of strange, secret moment. But she saw as well, but didn't know what to do. And that's the thing, isn't it? I guess lots of women listening to this will relate to that. And that line, nothing, nothing happened. It sticks with many of us. Yeah, I think when I started to when I started to look back a lot of the things that I was thinking of as oh it was just a weird um moment of sexism

I realized sexism is actually a really slippery term and I was using it as a catch-all for so I started writing poems about these moments that I was thinking of as nothing and realizing actually that was, that's a poem, poem about a near assault or that's quite a, you know, that's a poem about an ex-boyfriend who was actually a stalker and that's really disturbing. And, you know, so often I would look back and write these poems and think that I was just joking around and then realize actually what I've written is quite dark. And I've been, I think,

thinking of it as nothing or laughing about it as a way, it's a coping mechanism and it's a way of minimising what's happened because it's a lot to carry. I think of them as like little paper cuts, these moments that, you know, they don't stop you going out and doing anything, but you, they change the way that you move through the world. You write later on and describe other experiences later in the collection which are far more traumatic, particularly to Party. Yeah, again, I hadn't... That was a difficult poem to go back and write because I kind of just shut it off in my mind

as something that I almost felt I felt quite ashamed of. So in that poem, I'm writing about a near, I could, it was a near assault. It was an assault that almost happened. I'm qualifying myself now because an assault did take place. Someone did pin me down and put their hands on me. So already I'm kind of changing the story to cope with it because I've not actually, I never read that poem out. Even though it's in the book, I've never performed it.

But really that poem, again, it's about acts of resistance. I'm really interested in as well that my body kind of went into this fighting mode without me almost being in control of it um and then the questions that you get asked so um you know like why were you upstairs at the party why were you wearing that skirt that kind of victim blaming that can go on from society from family from friends so you were almost raped at this party and you managed to escape but but you as you say people questioned you afterwards why did you go upstairs why were you wearing that is it just too difficult for you to perform that is that is that why that

that's something that you don't do because that memory is just so awful for you um no again it's not it's not that it's so i don't know why i never why i never and i don't know whether i would have been raped because i don't know what would have happened next um and that's that i mean that that kind of feels like a moment that was tipping tipping on the edge that could have gone one way or the other i guess and i was i feel like i was lucky that i got that I got away before anything worse happened. I guess I don't read it at readings because I'm looking after myself. So everything that I've wanted to say about that is in the poem. So this is much harder talking about it kind of around the edges of the poem.

The poem feels like a shield that I can put in front of myself but because I'm going to be having conversations with people afterwards about experiences of sexism I'm quite careful normally about the poems I choose to share. Interestingly that you are putting a really positive spin on this you're dedicating this collection to your two and a half year old daughter, Ali. I'm guessing, as all mothers do, you want the world to be a better place for her and so that she's not going to experience the kind of things that you've been through and many others have been through. Yeah, definitely. I hope that she can kind of learn from some of the things that I did. But I guess when I was younger, I was completely unaware.

I hadn't heard of the word feminism or sexism. It was through writing that I came to find out about these things. But I've always moved, you know, I had a, I meant to say in the first poem, I should explain that I had a whole other life as a trumpet player and trumpet teacher. So I was going to say, it's not that I've got an unhealthy obsession with trumpet players, but actually I used to. So I've always moved through very kind of masculine worlds because brass playing, you know,

when I was at music college, there was mainly male brass players and just a few female brass players. So I've gone off onto a tangent, but yeah, I definitely want the world to be a better place. And just, you know, I do a lot of work with young writers now. And that gives me hope because they're so much more kind of switched on than I was. And they're at least aware of these things already.

And they're already kind of getting angry about them. Whereas I knew that these things were happening, but couldn't articulate them. I didn't have language for them. Listen, thank you so much for speaking to us and thank you for reading your poems so beautifully. Thanks for having me. No, it's a pleasure. Poet Kim Moore there with her new collection of poems,

All the Men I Never Married. And thank you so much for all of the examples you're sending in to us. I will read them throughout the course of the programme. Well, Kim was talking there about these acts of resistance when people put their hands on you. Well, this is certainly something that is resonating in Italy because an Italian TV journalist

is pressing charges against a football fan who allegedly sexually assaulted her live on air. Greta Picalia, who works for Toscana TV, was talking to fans outside a football stadium

following a Serie A game in Empoli, when one appeared to spit in his hand and then slap her on the bottom. Now, Bacalia has filed charges after police managed to identify the man. And the incident has caused a lot of dismay in Italy. Let's speak to the investigative journalist Alessia Ciorantola, who is based near Venice. Good morning. Good morning. Thank you for having me. No, thank you. First of all, just explain exactly what happened. This woman was on air and then what happened? Yeah, so a man, a fan from a football team approached her and so he basically touched,

slapped her on the bottom in front of the camera's line. So she was reporting out of the stadium. And so the comment from a journalist who was in the studio connected and again trying to, you know, speaking with the journalist, he said, yeah, let's go on, ignore it, you know, speaking with a journalist, he said, yeah, let's go on, ignore it. You know, it's nothing. And so basically dismissing what was happening in front of thousands of viewers.

And so, and of course, a journalist decided to not accept it and she filed a case against, and now the police is investigating the fan but this of course created a lot of reactions in Italy which is something that is not new unusual because he she had the support from many political politicians from both political sides and then of course social media there's been a lot of discussions and people also famous people supporting her but at the same time again we've seen reactions from men saying well at least she was a nice girl. So with some praises about the journalist and basically defending or anyways,

not condemning what the guy did in front of the camera. So again, there was, you know, it was not surprising because it's something that we know that with social media and especially it's easy for everyone to have access and to say their own opinion and not even hiding behind fake identities, by the way. So they were just providing these comments on support to the guy. And we mustn't forget this incident took place after a match which was played in order to raise awareness of violence against women. The players were all wearing a red mark on their faces as a sign of solidarity against harassment. And then this happens

outside. I mean, give us a sense of how common incidents like this are of women being assaulted, touched on the streets in Italy? In Italy, catcalling and street harassment are everyday occurrences across all the country. And they always have been considered somehow accepted or anyways they are brushed off with some comments like and they're considered like jokes or something that somehow is accepted by many people still today. Of course we can not by not by all, there's always a reaction and there's always, you know, part of the public opinion

who is reacting, but is commonly somehow still accepted by the majority. Why do you think that is? I think there's many factors. Italy, for cultural reasons, we are very behind for our political situations, which has been dominated for years by the machismo with the many political figures who basically supported or even incentivated a certain figure, a certain character of man who is controlling and has ownership on the woman.

Then we have religious influence, which is also putting the woman in a position that is, you know, she's basically the one who is taking care of the family, nursing a child, but is not respected as the level of a man. There's many, still today, we know that if you think about the fact that a case like rape within marriage, so inside a marriage, was not legally recognized until 1976, so very late. And it was not until 1996

that the rape was classified as a crime against, by the way, public morality, so not a human violation. So you have to consider all this cultural background and this context to see that also the laws are very low in recognizing and punishing these acts. So women feel less, they rely less on the justice system also when they have to denounce these behaviors and they don't feel protected. And one is this and the other strong element, and I'm speaking also as a journalist, is the the Italian journalism is still dominated, heavily dominated by male-centered newsrooms, where the presence of male is dominant and they are controlling and having a strong influence

on the news agenda and on the structure of the newsroom itself. And this is influencing also the language that is used by journalists when they report about these cases. The word rape is sometimes not, is often not used because it's not part, we try to brush off with the word abuse or something else, or when we describe a rape or a case of sexual harassment, in many cases we are somehow, we, I mean, in Italian journalism, there's sort of a you know an attempt to justify the man's action by saying well he was stressed

you know he's been left by the woman for another boyfriend. Well it's interesting you say that because this was was almost the defense of the man who's been accused wasn't it he said it wasn't a sexist act we lost the game it's something I did in a moment of irritation, as if some kind of justification for it. Yes, please understand me, right? So he was trying to have people share, you know, have the understanding from the viewers, just by saying that. Not only, he also said, I have a daughter,

which, so try to understand me because I'm also a father. So this is hard to see the connection between his gesture and the justification. But that's his defence. Listen, we have to leave it there. But thank you so much for speaking to us. A really fascinating insight into cultural norms within Italy. That was Alessia Ciarantola, who is an investigative journalist based near Venice.

I was asking you to get in touch with stories of people who have got away, the relationships that have got away from you. John on email says, I'm a recently divorced 50-year-old man. Out of the blue, six months ago, my first girlfriend that I met at university when we were 18 messaged me after nearly 23 years of no contact. We were together for over seven years, but eventually went our separate ways. We both realised we both kept each other in our hearts the whole time. Within a week, we'd met up and we'd fallen in love all over again. John, that is a heartwarming story that we need on this Wednesday. Beth on email says, I didn't realise it.

It turns out I was the one who got away. My boyfriend from when I was 19 called out of the blue in October this year. Apparently, he couldn't stop thinking about me. Songs and triggers reminded him of me left, right and centre. And he realised it was me he was meant to be with. I was sceptical, but we went on a few dates. We're now giving it another go. We talk for hours and hours and have an incredible connection. Certainly this was unexpected. Keep those stories coming. 84844 on the text. Now, last night in their World Cup 2023 qualifier, the Lionesses, England's women's football team,

beat their opponents Latvia 20-0. Now, of course, incredible win. And one that saw Manchester City's Ellen White become the top scorer ever for England. But what does that scoreline actually tell us about the structure of the women's game? As such, results are failing of trying to mimic the way that men's football is organized and some people are suggesting that it needs overhauling well let's speak to joe curry who's bbc women's sports reporter joe people will

know ellen white if they're not quite sure she does the glasses um celebration doesn't she when she scores yeah she's the the one with goggles, I think she's mostly known as. Yeah, what a night for her, what a night for England. An absolute thumping in the end, wasn't it? But you could hear it there in her voice, the emotion on the pitch when she finally, first of all, equaled that record and then broke it.

It's been talked about for such a long time, I think for her, it's actually a bit of a relief as well. I know that it's a fantastic result for England, but in reality, what does it really mean? Because, I mean, even the relatively new England manager, Serena Vigman, said, look, we need tougher opponents. This was not a test for us. I guess there's two ways to look at it.

And the first is you can only play and you can only beat what's in front of you. And after the World Cup in 2019, England went on a bit of a barren run where they were failing to beat teams that they should have been thrashing and fans obviously weren't happy. And now that they are thrashing teams, it seems other people aren't happy. So not everyone's going to be, you know, delighted to see a 20-0 scoreline.

On paper, it looks great for England, but when you're playing a team ranked 102nd in the world, as you said, it's not an awful lot you can take from it other than the fact that it's great for young players coming into the squad. They're getting used to the international setup without the pressure, really. We had two players on the pitch last night,

Lauren Hemp and Alicia Rousseau. They'd never scored for England. Hemp ended up getting four and Rousseau got a hat-trick. So it's building confidence that way. But in terms of a team, it's not a test and it's hard to gauge really where they're at when they're thrashing teams ranked so lowly. I mean, we shouldn't make out that this is just something that happens in the women's game. People will know, you know, England will often beat San Marino by a huge margin, not 20-0, clearly.

But is this a problem that's specific to the women's game? Because we know that the women's game here in England has really improved in recent years. I mean, just simple things like, God forbid, allowing women to train at the same place as the men, having the same facilities, the level of coaching staff. Strangely enough, that improves the game.

Is that a problem in other parts of the world? Is it a case that in other parts of the world, the women's game hasn't moved on as much as it has here? Yeah, I think it's important to say that globally, and I include the likes of England in this and other big hitting nations in women's football,

Germany, USA, the women's game is so much further behind the women's game, even in this country. In this country, the FA banned women's football for being played for decades and it's still having an impact now. So yes, England have more money available and they've been investing in the Lionesses for so long

and we're now seeing the rewards of that. But at the same time, the crowd sizes for top WSL matches are still in the sort of 2,000 or 3,000 compared to big Premier League crowds. So it is a problem globally, but it's the question we're having in the men's game as well, isn't it? Pre-qualifying, should that happen before a qualifying tournament? Is it fair on the smaller teams? Some people even even saying do they have the right to play the bigger teams

without going through that pre-qualifying process there's obviously the Nations League that UEFA have brought out in the men's in the men's competition has been hugely popular and successful but in terms of England getting better fixtures it's just a case of them getting friendlies because this qualifying campaign is not going to teach them anything. It's not going to test them. And in February, England are actually hosting their own friendly tournament. At the moment, Germany and Spain are also invited. So we should know in February where England are at. Let's talk a little bit about Serena Wiegmann, a new manager. She's only been in place a few months, hasn't she? But give us a sense of what she's like.

She seems quite no-nonsense. That's exactly how i describe her actually really the thing to yeah 100 so when she came in the september the first question i asked was serena are you the manager that's finally going to guide the lionesses to a major trophy because they've come so close to making finals before and her answer was simply i don't know it kind of stumped me a little bit but that gives you an idea that she was so used to Phil Neville her predecessor um always talking up England's chances yes we're going to win the World Cup yes we have the capabilities to win the Euros I've got some of the best players in the world and all of a sudden someone's come in and she doesn't suffer fools she's very likable the players say she's funny um no nonsense is

probably the way to look at it she helped the. So she's Dutch and she helped the Netherlands win the Euros title in 2017. And that's, you know, held in the Netherlands. So the fact that England are hosting the Euros next year, there are similar factors that I think people are hoping are going to come into play. She then led the Netherlands to the World Cup final in 2019. So when England signed her, she's still now widely regarded as the best manager in the world it was a real coup that the fa were able to prize her away from the dutch fa and i suspect a lot of money played a part in that as well but you know england have terrific players they've now got this this proven manager um and it's looking positive heading into the euros next

year but yes i think no nonsense is a very very very good way to put it. And a final word about Ellen White. So she is now the all-time top scorer for England. Just for people who aren't aware of her and what she's done, just give us a rundown. And she's only 32. You know, I was actually,

I was putting together a piece of BBC breakfast this morning on the game and I was surprised. I've been around the women's game for a long time and I didn't realise she was still only early 30s and you'd like to think that she's still got so much more to come. But she's been around the England team for such a long time. She's won trophies at Arsenal.

She's previously played with the likes of Leeds and Notts County. She's such a likeable figure. She doesn't enjoy the spotlight that much. And you can tell that from her interview last night that whilst it was a huge moment for her and she was very emotional she then sort of throws it back by talking about Kelly Smith and how great she was and that's whose record she broke last night she talks about how special a night it was for the whole team and how proud she is that you've got these youngsters coming through also scoring goals and that's a real testament to her the kind of

person she is the kind of player she is that on a night that it could have been all about her she tried to make it about other people as well. Jo Currie, thank you for speaking to us. BBC Women's Sport Reporter talking to us about that England victory against Latvia last night, 20-0. Lots of you getting in touch with us about the conversation we're having about the potential changes to Mississippi abortion laws. This text here says, on the topic of those laws being changed,

can we please keep the emphasis on how dramatically socially unfair these new conditions will be, predominantly for women of colour and poorer economic backgrounds. These best opportunities for women to have a career or access to care have in practice not yet trickled down to the most deprived levels in our society. Another one here saying, I'm not anti-abortion, I'm pro-adoption. If a mother is properly supported, then she can have a worthwhile life. Thank you for listening to Woman's Hour. That's all from today's Woman's Hour. I hope you can join us again next time. Hello, I'm Professor Stephen Pinker. We all want to reason more clearly and to make better choices about everything from life and love to medicine and money. But even the best of us get things wrong. I would have twice as many billions if I just made a different decision.

I mean, of course, one can always learn from other people's mistakes. It's ideal to do that. Each episode is a conversation with an expert on rationality and someone who deals with our corresponding irrationality in real life. Rarely do we sort of walk around living out probabilities. Oh my God, wait, 90% prevalence. It's hard to sort of hold onto that in real life. I hope you'll join us as we try to make sense of making sense

and hopefully to make better decisions. That's Think with Pinker from BBC Radio 4. Subscribe now on BBC Sounds. I'm Sarah Trelevan, and for over a year, I've been working on one of the most complex stories I've ever covered. There was somebody out there who was faking pregnancies. I started, like, warning everybody. Every doula that I know. It was fake.

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

Available now.