Woman's Hour - Weekend Woman's Hour: Kids and screen time, Nikki Lilly, The Traitors, Subpar relationships, Mia McKenna-Bruce

Episode Date: January 17, 2026

Parents of under-fives in England are to be offered official advice on how long their children should spend watching TV or looking at computer screens. It comes as government research shows about 98% of children under two were watching screens on a daily basis - with parents, teachers and nursery staff saying youngsters were finding it harder to hold conversations or concentrate on learning. To discuss this further Nuala McGovern is joined by Kate Silverton, child counsellor and parenting author, and Professor Sonia Livingstone from the London School of Economics and author of Parenting for a Digital Future. In 2025 alone she walked at Paris Fashion Week, spoke at the United Nations about face equality and won 'Fashion and beauty influencer of the year' at the the UK and Ireland TikTok awards, all while managing a chronic illness. Nikki Lilly is a Bafta and Emmy award-winner, an influencer and a campaigner and she joined Anita Rani in the studio.The latest series of The Traitors has sparked controversy after two black women, Netty and Judy, were the first to leave – one ‘murdered’ by the Traitors and the other banished at the roundtable. The debate goes beyond the game - is it exposing unconscious bias and raising bigger questions? Do reality TV shows like this hold up a mirror to society, revealing uncomfortable truths around racism, misogyny, and ageism? Author and arts columnist at the Independent Micha Frazer-Carroll and freelance writer Chloe Laws, who have both written on this topic and are both fans of the show, discuss.What happens if the person you’re in a relationship with doesn’t quite meet all the qualities you look for in a long-term partner? Do you stay anyway? Journalist Eve Simmons has recently written about this in her new book, ‘What She Did Next’, which looks at why millennial women might settle for what she calls ‘subpar’ relationships. Nuala was also joined by psychotherapist and broadcaster Lucy Beresford who believes it may not just be women settling for less.Miss Marple and Poirot have been household names for decades but now one of Agatha Christie’s lesser-known sleuths – Lady Eileen ‘Bundle’ Brent - is finally getting her time in the spotlight. The fearless young amateur detective is the focus of new Netflix mystery series Seven Dials. Mia McKenna-Bruce is the award-winning actor bringing ‘Bundle’ to the screen, alongside Helena Bonham-Carter and Martin Freeman, and Mia joined presenter Nuala live in the studio.The Ayoub Sisters are Scottish Egyptian siblings Sarah and Laura Ayoub who play cello and violin. Their debut album was recorded in Abbey Road Studios with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. Their second album, Arabesque, was released independently and went to number one in the iTunes chart. They are about to undertake a UK tour to celebrate their 10th anniversary, which will include the premiere of their Arabic Symphony in a homecoming concert in Glasgow.Presenter: Anita Rani Producer: Annette Wells

Hello, I'm Anita Rani and welcome to Woman's Hour from BBC Radio 4. Just to say that for rights reasons, the music in the original radio broadcast has been removed for this podcast. Hello and welcome to the programme. Coming up, actor Mia McKenna Bruce, who is the sleuth heroine of the Agatha Christie remake of the Seven Dials Mystery, called Christy for the next generation. Are you watching Traitors? What does the series and other reality TV formats for that matter reveal about society and who we judge and how we judge them.

Also, the sub-par relationship. Are many millennial women, that's women in their 30s and 40s, settling for men that are not their equal? Nikki Lilly, the fashion and beauty influencer of the year who walked at Paris Fashion Week, one of the first with facial difference to do so. But first, parents of under fives in England are to be offered official advice

on how long their children should spend watching TV or looking at computer screens. It comes as government research, was published showing that about 98% of children under two were watching screens on a daily basis, with parents, teachers and nursery staff saying youngsters were finding it harder to hold conversations or concentrate on learning. The government says it will publish its first guidance on screen time for the age group in April. Well, to discuss this, Nula was joined by Kate Silverton, child counsellor and parenting author and Professor Sonia Livingston at the London School of Economics

and author of Parenting for a Digital Future. She began by asking Professor Livingstone, what she thinks has led to the government making this announcement now. Well, I think it's actually been a long time coming and parents have been asking for this. Experts have been asking for guidance from the government for years now. But this new survey has some provocative findings. They compare children at nine months and then later at two years

and find that those who have been exposed to a very high amount of screen time, about five hours a day, have less vocabulary. And that raises all kinds of questions, really, about what's going on in those homes where children are watching for five hours a day, but also, of course, fits with concerns about how children are developing in a digital age. Kate, what about those numbers? Were you surprised by how high screen use is for some? I think most of us struggle with monitoring our own screen time

and are often surprised by how often we've been on a screen during the day. The WHO is actually really clear on this, which is interesting, that we still haven't got this clarity, isn't it? So I really welcome hearing more. But under twos, according to the WHO, are best with, and I think this is going to come as a shock to many of us, with no sedentary screen time at all, aside from something like video calling with family,

and two to four-year-olds should have no more than about one hour a day of what they call high-quality interactive screen use, really less. Certainly there's enough research emerging for us to question the wisdom of our children spending time passively in front of screens for long periods. I am struck by that word you use as well, adding to screen time sedentary. So like if you are passive, I suppose, do you want to expand on that, Kate, how you understand it? Well, what our brain, so when our, when babies are born into the world, their brain is very primitive, it's still, it's still developing. And it's, our babies are completely dependent on us for their survival.

So it's why the brain does its fastest development in those first three years of life. And what our babies are dependent on and what the brain is dependent on is human engagement. Being talked to, played with, held, moved, emotionally met, not through passive watching. And I think that's the thing. It's not what promotes healthy brain development

is human engagement. We can't get away from that. You know, screens might be part of modern life, but the human brain hasn't changed for thousands of years. Well, that WHA advice, I'd like to bounce that around with both of you. What age was it under no screen time at all, Kate, did you say? Under twos. Under twos, no screen time whatsoever.

Do you think that's realistic? Well, look, I'm a mom. I think that every parent wants to feel empowered by information. We don't want opinion-led parenting. But I think we are, for me, I'm passionate about evidence-based research. and it's clear to me now that, well, not now. I mean, this is research that I've been doing for many, many years. We have to take that on board.

We are all in the brain development business. And if we want to do our job well, and I mean us as parents, I mean schools, I mean the tech giants, we need to really pay attention to the evidence that is already there and the research that is continuing to emerge. What do you think about that, Sonia? Under 2's no screen time whatsoever, realistic. So I also think we don't want to start.

building a rod for our own backs, you know, we have to be realistic about the world that parents are in. And often we're talking about a mum on her own at home, you know, with a toddler probably driving her mad. So, you know, let's not create such an impossible requirement that actually no one can survive it. But I do think we should make a distinction between, I agree, there is not really evidence that screen time when they're little is helpful. But there is evidence that if you're going to have some screen time, not too much, but some, then some kinds of content on screen are more helpful than others. And some ways that the parents can engage with the child and the screen are. So if, for example, what you're watching is a super fast-paced cartoon in which the child just kind of sits and stares at one and a half, there's no evidence of benefit. it. But if you're talking about that same child watching something that is kind of slower that

offers the parent some games and songs that they can sing with their child and the child is looking at the parent as well and the parent is doing the responding, then, you know, that's not harmful. And so we could say, you know, not all parents have got all the songs and stories at their fingertips and they don't always know how to, you know, occupy their child for hours every day. So sometimes that can be helpful as a way of encouraging the parent and child to do exactly. that interaction. Yeah, I think I also want to clarify, we're not talking, are we, about sort of 10 minutes, we're talking about this extended period that you first started discussing. So I want to be clear on that from my perspective as well. But as you say, we don't want to make a rod

for parents back. But I do think it's really helpful for parents to know what is good for their children's brain development and actually maybe what we might want to change. And I will just go through some of those figures again. So children with the highest screen use around five hours a day could say significantly fewer words than those with the lower. screen use, but even that was around 44 minutes a day. People will have no doubt different thoughts on whether that is a little

or a lot. But you know, Kate, we can talk about what's put in front of the child, but you know, they are sponges, right? And even if you are limiting screen use, maybe even your own screen use, go on public transport, go to a restaurant, people

are on their phones, the other adults that they will be imitating are on these tiny screens in front of them. Do you have any thoughts about that? It's really hard, first of all, and I get it. Any parent that has taken their young ones to a restaurant or anything, what I will say is, look, screens haven't always been here. So we've had to work with our children,

and they're very limited attention span for quite a long time. And there's so many different ways and means that we can support our children and ourselves in those moments. And I think it's that thing of, look, I mean, I'm not trying to idealise it, but as I say, I'm a parent with young kids. Well, our children really, when they start after sort of two and three, their brain wants that they're curious.

So yes, very young, they're dependent on us, but they're designed to be curious. So actually, once we set our children up, and once you do it, it becomes a lot easier. When you set them up in play, there is then time. Once a child gets engaged in something, and if you're out for dinner, getting them with a coloring book or a little game that they're playing with their siblings or whatever,

and trust, because I've had to do it, that short-term pain of getting them into that in the first place gives us the long-term game because eventually the brain, which is wired for play and curiosity, takes them into that zone and then you get your piece. So it's almost like this small window you have to get them into the zone of play and then you can do your thing and get on with what we need to be getting on with. But if we just sort of just pick up the screen because it works, I will say we are the other thing to consider is do you want a teen that's going to be a lot more difficult to get off that screen later on? We want our children bonding with us, not with their iPad. So kind of thinking about the

future as well. A message coming in, I'm mum to a seven-year-old and let him watch screens during nappy changes at a time when he was a toddler and I needed to go to the Lou, for example. I'm not very proud of it, but what I'm concerned about now is that I'm expecting a second child and cannot see how no screens for them would be possible. That's Miriam. Thanks for your honesty. Another saying, I can't believe people need guidance on this. It's surely a no-brainer. Don't put a young child in front of a screen.

It's simple. But why we're talking about this is that there is guidance to come out in April. We hear that the government is looking for advice from people like yourselves, experts, people who are working with children, parents, of course, teachers, etc. What advice would you give, Sonia? Or what would you like guidance on? What do you think is the nub of it? I think parents would probably value a range of kinds of advice.

I mean, one is ways to play with your child, singing games, nursery rhymes, sources of fun that you can do with your child. And some of that might come from a screen, but it might not. It might come along with the NHS guidance on food or keeping your home safe, which, you know, currently there isn't any screen time advice coming from NHS or from health. visitors that I can see or that parents tell me. I think given that we're acknowledging there's going to be some screen time, I think a really crucial question parents ask is, okay, so which kinds are okay and which kinds are not? And that's something I would love the government advice to give

real attention to. You know, basically a screen cannot ever respond to your child. Your child can say something. They can join in. They can guess what comes next in the story. They can walk away from and the screen has no idea. So it's profoundly unresponsive. And I think, you know, if there are some ways in which some kind of content can do a to and fro sometimes with the child or encourage the parent to do that or a sibling. So we are saying that. I understand.

Kate, let me turn it over to you. What would you like to see? Well, I would say young children don't develop from what they watch. They develop from who they're with. So as you say, if that is with something that helps you engage with your child, then great. But what about a book? What about, you know, games? So there's lots of things we can do with our toddlers and our young children that don't involve screens and actually make us feel better in the process.

You know, we want to be bonding with our children. I get that it's hard. I think parents have never had it harder in terms of the pressures that we have on our time and the pools that we have. But it really, I think, when it comes to screens and how much we know that children need us for their attunement and for their regulation. You know, toddlers need help with their emotional regulation. if we're 20 seconds, they're not going to get that with a screen. So what we're doing is helping to shape a healthy brain, and who doesn't want that for their child?

I think there was something else interesting in the research about reading books. We showed actually reading books has not changed in 10 years. So parents are doing it, but not all parents are doing it. And again, that's something the guidance could encourage. Professor Sonia Livingston and Kate Silverton there. And this is what Education Secretary Bridget Philipson had to say. We know from the evidence and from what parents and teachers are telling us that too much passive screen time can start to crowd out the talking, play and reading that are so important for children's language and development in the early years. That's why this guidance will be shaped by parents and sit alongside Best Start Family Hubs rolling out in every local area, helping ensure our youngest children get the best start in life and can seize the opportunities ahead.

Now, in 2019, Nikki Lilly won both an Emmy Kids Award. for her CBBC show My Life, Born to Vlog and Abafter. She was the youngest ever recipient at 15 for her inspiring work as a YouTuber and presenter. Nikki highlights chronic illness, self-acceptance and face equality and has also used her platform to speak out against facial edits online. Last year, she won fashion and beauty influencer of the year 2025 at the UK and Ireland TikTok Awards. She walked Paris Fashion Week, one of the first women with a facial.

difference to do so. She spoke at the United Nations about face equality and, as she puts it, made it to 21. Well, Nikki joined me in the studio this week and I began by asking her what it was like walking out at Paris Fashion Week. It was incredible and very surreal. I have always loved fashion and beauty. You know, it's a massive part of my job, but I think for a long time I felt very kind of isolated from the industry. As we all know, fashion is not the most inclusive space at the best of times and so Paris Fashion Week is somewhere where all of you know the biggest brand show and do their shows twice a year and it's the kind of notoriously one that is really difficult to have access to especially if you have a difference and so this brand called Mathieu Facal I wore one of their

dresses to Cannes Film Festival earlier in 2025 and their whole ethos is redefining what it means to be in the fashion industry and challenging stereotypes and norms. And obviously that's something I completely resonate with and I'm trying to do in my small way. And so they asked me a couple of months before if I'd walk in their show. And it's not something I've ever done before. I can barely walk in a straight line. So I was like, oh, I don't know if I can do this. But I think it was kind of equally an instant yes because of what it embodies and it being kind of like a mark in history, me doing it.

So it was incredibly surreal. I think, you know, I said on the day that I've always loved the fashion industry, but I've never felt fully embraced back by it and accepted into it. And it was the first time where I felt wholly accepted. So important. It felt like history. Yeah, no, absolutely. And I mentioned, you know, you're winning the TikTok Award.

Let's just talk about figures. How many YouTube followers? How many TikTok followers? I think in total on social media, I have like 15 million followers. 15 million followers. And so many people know all about you. and you are so inspiring. But let's explain your story because it is remarkable.

You were at the age of six diagnosed with AVM. Tell us about that. How did that change your life and what AVM is? Yeah, so I was diagnosed with AVM or arteriovenous malformation at six years old. I was born with it. You have to be born with an AVM, but it can be dormant until any age. So mine became active at six, but till then, both sides of my face looked like, you know, the average child's knew no different to like a normal, happy,

life till then and then at six years old some veins and swelling started appearing on the right side of my face and we didn't think too much of it but went to the GP got a check-up and he was kind of quite worried and quickly referred me to another doctor and then I had some scams and tests and I was referred to another doctor and then they finally told me that I had an AVM so what an AVM is it's a rare condition you can get it in any part of your body but mine's in my face and head and that type affects three in a million. And it's basically an abnormal connection between your arteries and veins when you're being formed. So a switch genetically that should turn on or off doesn't. And so a cluster is kind of formed in an abnormal connection between them. And the capillaries, which you have all of

all over your body, don't form between your arteries and veins. So it leads to a buildup in swelling, a build up of pressure. And ultimately, the hardest part of my condition has been I can get life-threatening nosebleeds so a few years ago I was in a coma because I lost so much blood. I've had to date 98 surgeries since I was six years old and yeah my childhood got taken away very quickly you know there's currently no cure for an AVM so everything that you do when you have one is just trying to give you a slightly better quality of life and manage symptoms. 98 operations yes and you're in that coma for eight days yeah how old were you? 13 yeah yeah yeah yeah You were eight years old when you, you, and it was you, right?

I mean, it doesn't surprise me, knowing what I know about you and you're sitting here, at the age of eight you had the will and the capacity to say, I want to go online. Yeah. Because you wanted to document your life. I wonder how you, what your parents, the conversation between your parents, because obviously parents want to protect their child. Of course. And but also they, well, tell me, you tell me, how did that play out?

Yeah, so I was a very active and chatty child. I had every single hobby. I was on a boys football team and, you know, I had to give up all of these things that I love that kind of defined me as a person and made me happy. And my identity at six in a heartbeat, they were kind of pulled away from me. And so watching videos online,

whether it was in hospital or at home, because I was only and either, I didn't really go to school, became my escapism. And I was always kind of in my own world. I'd film these little videos on our family iPad and didn't do anything with them to cope, really, and have a bit of a safe haven.

and forget about being a sick child. And one day I asked my mum and dad if I'd be able to create a YouTube channel just for myself, just a little project for me to put my time into and have something that was completely unrelated to my condition, which felt like was defined my life, essentially,

and something that was in my control, that was mine. And, you know, of course, parents being parents, I don't, if my eight-year-old came to me and said I want to start a channel, I'd be like, no, I don't think so. But I think my circumstances were a bit of an exception to the rule. My parents were obviously very nervous

because my appearance had started to change and they understood what I didn't which was that people could be unkind online because I kind of lived in a bubble. I was used to being stared at a bit in public but never really receiving direct comments about my appearance. So the only way that I would be able to do it is if comments were turned off for the first couple of years

and that was fine with me because it was for me anywhere. I didn't care about that or really understand that side of it and it became my safe haven and my outlet and then a couple of years down the line when I was 10 we negotiated for me to tell my comments on. And what happened?

When you saw them? Yeah, I mean, it's not like I had loads of comments. I wasn't getting followers from the get-go, but that didn't matter. But obviously, I received lots of lovely comments, you know, that really spurred me on to continue and people with conditions and even AVMs from people saying,

I'm from India and I have an AVM, which you would never have known about. So that's the beauty of social media as it connects people in a way that you never would have known. You find community. Exactly that, especially if you don't feel like you have that in your real life. But equally, obviously, I received some negative comments, things saying you're a monster or why do you look like that or you're so ugly, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And that was incredibly difficult because it kind of broke that fourth wall of me not really being able to believe that people could be so unkind online. And yeah, it was very difficult.

And I took a break from social media, but my parents reminded me this is yours. So if you don't want to do it anymore, that's your. choice but I think it almost like I didn't want to let those haters win essentially and this was always for me and so of course I internalised those a little bit I was a child and we're all human but I think as the years have gone on I've understood that it's so much more about the person commenting than it ever is about you absolutely and it takes a lot of people a long time to even get to that place oh yeah so you've had to understand that from a very young age but you got success yeah And it's obviously because you're such a brilliant communicator.

You were still really young in your teens when you got a CBBC show. Yeah. And you got to interview Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, who was the Labour leader at the time. You asked Teresa about dealing with criticism. What did she say to you? And also, what did it mean to be able to have that TV show? I mean, it felt very special. It was kind of off the back of I just had my documentary, my life, which you mentioned.

And we were working with the same TV. team. And it was really special. It was kind of me as a 13 year old talking to public figures and politicians about what they were like when they were my age. And obviously everyone has a different story to tell and kind of humanising them. You know, things like Theresa May obviously at the time she was our prime minister. And I remember being so nervous sitting in 10 Downing Street as well, first series with her whole team surrounding us. But yeah, I think, you know, she kind of said that she tries to block out the noise by doing things that she love.

and obviously being someone that is in the public eye, especially at her level as a politician, you're exposed to a lot more scrutiny than the average person. And so she kind of said that she tries her best to sort of detach when she can. But it was really interesting. The video interviewing her, I think a lot of people,

like I think the time said it was like her best interview she'd ever done. And I think that's it. I really, if I wanted that series to be anything, it was just to humanize the people and talk about about who they were before they were who we know them as now. And you got great success. Yeah. A BAFTA and an Emmy.

Yeah. Insane. Both in the same year. Especially, you know, the Emmy was for the documentary about my life, which felt insane because I was, you know, just a child that was trying to navigate having a chronic illness and growing up and feeling like such an outsider and so isolated. So the fact that this documentary that just followed my life was just that

was recognized by. by the Emmys, let alone received one. And then equally for the BAFTA, the BAFTA Special Award, I'm sure, as you know, is something that BAFTA has to choose you for. It's not something you win. And I was the youngest ever person to be selected for it,

and most people get it as recognition at the end of their career or nearer. Yeah, it's huge. It's huge. So that was, I remember I received a letter, basically, Bafter asking if I'd accept, and I had to call and say, yes, I accept, and it was, like, sealed,

and with, like, a wax kind of sticker. And I remember thinking, who would not accept this? You know, it was, yeah, it was so surreal. Nikki, Lily there, and Nikki's Live A Little podcast is available now wherever you get your podcasts. And you can hear the full interview with Nikki by going to BBC Sounds. Now the latest series of the traitors has sparked controversy after two black women, Nettie and Judy, were the first to leave, one murdered by the traitors and the other banished at the round table.

The debate, however, goes beyond the game. Is it exposing unconscious bias and raising bigger questions? Do reality TV shows like this hold up a mirror to society revealing uncomfortable truths around racism, misogyny and ageism? Spoiler alert, there may be some details revealed in this discussion about the current series of the traitors. Well, to discuss this, I was joined by author and arts columnists at the independent Misha Fraser Carroll and freelance writer Chloe Laws,

who have both written on this topic and are both fans of the show. I started by asking Misha what she meant when she said it was bleakly predictable when describing how people of colour are leaving the show early. So I wrote this piece in The Independent basically discussing, well, worrying trend that I feel like I've seen across different series of the traitors, which is people of colour leaving the series very early on. Not the best source ever, but the only research that I could find on this was from a redditor who compiled kind of all of the early exits from the show

and found that 40% of people who leave in the early rounds of the traitors are people of colour, and that's a disproportionate figure to the number of people of colour who are actually on the show. And I feel like this is something that we see across reality TV, not only in terms of the statistics of the number of people leaving, but also the ways that they're discussed and the ways that they're treated. So I feel like there's often this kind of pattern where black people specifically are, for example, described as aggressive or suspicious or hostile or things like going on the offensive, when I think that that behaviour would be seen differently if they weren't black people.

And I think you see this in all kinds of ways that are also gendered, relate to disability. And I think, like you say, there is something about holding up a mirror to the society that we live in and something about traitors that feels like it is this sort of microcosm of dynamics that we see every day in places like the workplace.

You were initially hesitant about speaking up about this. Why? I think that it's really awkward and uncomfortable to talk about. I think that as a person of colour who's written on race for years and years, I'm very used to bringing it up and people saying, you know, you're playing the race card, you've got a chip on your shoulder,

you make everything about race. And I think that that's really difficult, especially when it comes to things like pop culture and reality TV where people might kind of say, you know, it's not that serious, it's just a game. And I think I want to be able to kind of tread that line of saying, yeah, it is just a game. And I don't want to necessarily approach this with a spirit of anger

or like, you know, this is the worst thing in the world. but simultaneously it is something that's happening and I do think we should be able to talk about it and I think that women of colour like me are very used to experiencing backlash and people kind of getting very angry when we talk about it but yeah I think that we should name it and start a conversation about it.

Chloe, what makes this show stand out compared to other reality TV shows when it comes to revealing what some might say unconscious bias and thinking of Big Brother or Love Island strictly, I'm a celebrity. What's your take? I think any game that is based on social judgments, our internalised biases will come out.

So people who are seen as bossy or quiet or game playing. And I think this show is so brilliant and so loved. And so it almost, you know, I'm almost more upset to see these biases come out because we're not expecting it as much as we would with something like Love Island. What do you mean by that? I think Love Island has been, has a history of misogyny. Whereas The Traitors is really an entertaining game. that many of us love, but it has still been susceptible to general societal, you know, biases that we all feel like misogyny or racism.

Misha? Yeah, I think Chloe raises an interesting point. I think that things like the traitors are often viewed as like more family friendly, maybe less of a kind of brutal kind of show. And I think in dating shows, unfortunately, the sad reality is that black women and women of color, we're very used to being treated as less desirable and being kind of chosen last and things like that. Whereas with traitors, I think you think of it as more of a kind of like fun-spirited game

where you wouldn't see things like this come up, but they certainly do. Is it racism? Is it unconscious bias? And what is unconscious bias? I think that the way that we name it is like a really interesting topic of discussion as well. I think that I would name it as racism, not in the sense that it's interpersonal or any individual is like deliberately or overtly perpetuating racism. But rather I think of racism. as something that is collective. It happens on the level of the group, on a systemic level. And I think that is what we're seeing come up in traitors. It's something that is happening

primarily at the roundtable. So when everyone gets together as a group, and I think that it is something that's unconscious. And yeah, when we talk about unconscious bias, we're talking about something that is not deliberate. It's not something that people know that they're doing. But rather that as we move through the world and move through society, we internalize and absorb racist ideas that are around us. So these are very subtle things like black people potentially being a bit more suspicious or outside of the group. But it's definitely not something that I think is kind of done knowingly or deliberately.

Chloe, there might be people listening who don't, I've never seen the program, maybe a couple. So explain it's in the round tables where everything hinges on instinct and that these biases and these prejudices come to the fore. Explain more what happens. What are people seeing? Yeah. So there's traitors that are selected by Claudia, and then there's faithfuls, and the faithfuls have to find out who the traitors are. And the traitors are secretive and lying, and then they murder faithfuls throughout the show.

So each episode, there's a murder, and then there's a roundtable where the faithfuls have to accuse the traitors of being traitors. And I think often, as you say, this is where the biases come out. And people, you know, there's gendered biases as well, where the women are kind of always subjected to this double. bind criticism, so attacked for being too bossy or too quiet, and they kind of can't win ever. So we saw it this season with Fiona, but then we're also seeing it with Jade. And I think it's just a real microscope to this very human behaviour. Like we all hold unconscious biases, and it's not an individual problem with this show and the contestants.

This is a societal one. And I think the show is just kind of letting us watch this come out, because I think it's not necessarily malicious, but it's still important and it's still real. And I think, you know, we see a lot of outright racism and misogyny directed to the contestants on the show on the flip side on social media, which I think is almost as important as discussions that we're having about the contestants. Absolutely. Tell us more. So, I mean, there were three women who just won the island game version, and they have all said that they have been subjected to loads of misogyny online on social media.

since winning that they were called Mean Girls and Katty and nasty and we're seeing it now with Rachel on the show. We see it with the people of colour on the show constantly where the kind of fans are not favourting them and it's I think they're receiving

kind of backlash and bullying just because of these biases and these prejudices and that we see that throughout reality TV and women generally with a platform are subjected to it but I think the unconscious biases we're seeing in the castle are also happening outside of it

and the contestants are both victims and also kind of perpetrating these as well. Yeah, Misha, Judy and Nettie, were the first women to leave traitors this year. What struck you about the language and the reasoning used against them? I think the language was really telling. So Judy was called Angry

while she was on the show at the round table and also criticised for being too serious. This was a big thing that when the game began, she became really serious. And I think, again, it's interesting to think about the idea that actually was that influenced by race. And if she was a different person, would that be too serious or would that be the game has begun?

Like, everyone's behaving seriously. And I think it kind of mirrored, yeah, what happened to Temeca Emson last year on the celebrity season where she was kind of categorized as going on the offensive. Yeah. And so I think that that language does feel specifically related to the ways that black women are often kind of framed as being angry black women. Someone just messaged in saying, I noticed the black people, people of colour being voted off first.

I've stopped even mentioning it, as the reaction is always what your guests have mentioned. As I'm a black woman, my opinion is seen as paranoia. It's really important that we discuss this. It's interesting that we are able to discuss this now. I've noticed that the articles that are being written about it is because we have more black women writing for prominent publications. Now, maybe this conversation wouldn't even be happening 10 years.

Well, it wasn't happening 10 years. years ago. Yeah, it wasn't happening. And I think it's really kind of, it gives me hope that you and I, as like, two women of colour, can be sat here and talking about this. And I agree with you that I don't even think it would enter the public realm about a decade ago. And now it feels like a conversation that's really overdue is just getting started. And I'm glad that we're talking about it. But I also think that that could go further to it being discussed, for example, on the show, or maybe in the show's counterpart, uncloked. I think there could be a way that it's actually named, because traitors, I think, has like the tonal range to be able to do that

and has so far sparked conversations about disability, neurodiversity. And this is starting to feel like something that audiences are talking about. And I think that if they could bring it into the show, that would feel really nice. Like they were naming this thing rather than ignoring it. Well, certainly as talking about it is giving some of our listeners a reason to get in touch, which we like. My family, we are black, have seen and discussed this trend of black contestants being eliminated early, as well as being labelled differently for years and years, it's so noticeable and blatant to most black people

as this is our lived experience in the UK. Chloe, can we also see this sort of bias or underlying prejudice around gender and age, sometimes tipping into misogyny? How do you see that playing out in this series? Yeah, definitely. I think like any other bias, it's coming out, and this series, it's prevalent,

but definitely not as prevalent as season two, where there was a real boys club that became quite infamous. there were six traitors throughout that season and only one was a woman. She was a woman of colour and she was voted off very quickly. It was male voices that dominated the season and I think at one point it was only women

who had been murdered by the group of male traitors and in season three I think there was a very conscious decision by casting and production to make sure that the traitors were women. This season is a little bit more mixed but you can definitely see, I think again back to that double bind criticism. So the men who are attention-grabbing are seen as convenient for the traitors,

whereas the women who are attention-grabbing or loud is seen as, you know, erratic and dangerous or rude. And we're seeing it play out, you know, with, say, Harriet last night. She has been very good at the game. And so it's Roxy. And they are receiving, you know, quite a bit of heat about being traitors,

but also online have had quite a lot of abuse directed at them. Whereas the men who are displaying similar characteristics, haven't really received as much and are pretty well loved. So I think from both within the castle and without it, you can definitely see lines of, you know, underlying sexism. Gabby Windley, who was on the US show, said that in the castle the men didn't take her seriously. So I think that, you know, the female confesses on the show

have felt it themselves as well. It's not just us kind of projecting that. I'm going to read out this message and get your reaction to it, Misha. I'm listening to your programme with increasing disbelief about racial discrimination in the traditional. is absolutely ridiculous. I watch this program and don't think for one minute there is any racism whatsoever

and that's Fran from Welshpool. Yeah, well I think Fran's comment points towards kind of the slipperiness and how hard it is to kind of pin down what's happening here. And I think it's very common when we talk about unconscious bias to look at these instances and say, I can't see racism. You know, I can't point towards it and say this is exactly what's happening in this individual interaction. And I think it just points towards the fact that these aren't about

individual phenomena. They are things that play out on the level of the collective. And I think, yeah, it's very hard to watch one episode and say this episode was racist. But I think that one thing that is a positive about having so many seasons of the show now, we have a kind of lot of data to look at. And it is a pattern. And I think a pattern that we can't ignore. Misha, Fraser Carroll and Chloe Laws there. We did ask the BBC and the production company studio Lambert who make the traitors for a response. The BBC didn't want to comment and were yet to hear back from Studio Lambert. Remember, you can enjoy Woman's Hour any hour of the day. If you can't join us live at 10 a.m. during the week, all you need to do is subscribe to the podcast. It's daily and it's free on BBC

sounds. Now, what happens if the person you're in a relationship with doesn't quite meet all of the qualities you're looking for in a long-term partner? But you stay anyway. It's something journalist Eve Simmons has written about recently in the Times newspaper and her new book, What She Did Next, which looks at why millennial women might settle for what she calls sub-par relationships. Eve joined Nula this week, along with psychotherapist and broadcaster Lucy Beresford, and she began by asking Eve, why was this something she wanted to write about? So three years ago, I was very shocked when my husband of just six months and partner of nine years out of seemingly nowhere told me that he didn't want to be married anymore, he didn't

want to be with me anymore. And I was totally devastated, gutted, felt like the bottom had totally fallen out of my world and would have done anything to have made it work. And then sort of following on from that and the recovery, I guess, from that took me, as most journalists do, to a kind of investigating element of this story. And I was so fascinated by this idea of blindsiding. I'd spoken to divorce lawyers who'd said that they see this often with men. that they just suddenly, you know, something happens at the touch of a button and they call it out on everything and just sort of destroy their lives seemingly, very suddenly. And I found that very, very interesting.

And when I kind of put a call out to women to see if anyone else had experienced this kind of situation and the sudden end of a relationship, lots and lots of people got in touch with me and said it was very kind of eerily similar situation in that their partner of a very, very long time had just ended things totally out of nowhere. But the thing that I thought was the most fascinating was that all of these women, including myself on some reflection and after a lot of therapy, said that it was the best thing that ever happened to them and that actually they realised that they were totally settling

for someone who was a complete mismatch and they are far better off without their ex-partner and life has dramatically improved since their breakup. Now, the word subpar, you use it to describe men and relationships. but that's a bit harsh calling someone subpar. Yes, it's a controversial term, but I guess it kind of highlights what I'm trying to say, and I understand it is a bit of a tongue-in-cheek word,

but it's on the whole means a mismatch. So, you know, somebody who doesn't necessarily make you that happy, but what I did see with, I've interviewed about 20 women in the book, and there are commonly occurring themes, so these men do seem to be sort of quite, directionless, not very emotionally mature or emotionally intelligent, sort of lack self-reflections or unable to look at difficult things that have happened in their life and take accountability.

And then often also there is an element of being sort of very wrecked by insecurity, which then becomes a bit of a monster when they're with a woman who is perhaps professionally successful. thinking about all that. Obviously it's not all men that you were talking about. No, not all men may have the most wonderful male partner, I must say, who's supremely above par, I would say. Lucy, how common is it do you think for people, women, or indeed men, to settle in a relationship, even if it's not all that they wanted to be? And why do you think they do that? Well, there's a lot to unpack there, because I think it is very important that you've raised that word, settle, because in a way, Eve's use of the phrase subpar is a much more modern parlance for a very similar phenomenon,

which is that a lot of people, particularly in their 20s and early 30s, they look around, they see that a lot of other people are getting engaged and getting married. And then, of course, for women in particular, fertility is nothing, if not finite. And therefore, if your game plan ultimately is to have a family, then you need to be paying attention to that element of it. And therefore, a lot of people do end up marrying the person that they are with in their late 20s, early 30s, which is not quite the same as marrying the person you love or marrying the person that you can't live without, but it is very much about marrying the person that you are with at the time in order for other things to evolve. And what that leads to

is perhaps something that occurs a little bit later, which is a realization that in fact you're not very similar or that you can't grow together or that you are unwilling to embrace the developments that might be happening for you as an individual or for the other person. And what that means is quite a lot of friction. There was quite an interesting study from EUGov, the polling company, they worked with Ashley Madison, the married dating website people to see, okay, so why do people have affairs and it's because the existing relationship, the primary relationship, one might argue, is subpar. It is no longer fulfilling the needs that you might have. And we're not just talking about sexual needs here, but emotional needs, feeling heard, feeling validated, or even sharing the

same values or the same ambition, which is another thing that Eve has talked about, this sort of mismatch in ambition. And that if you don't get that in your primary relationship, and we do only have one life, why would you settle? And I think that's the big debate at the moment is, do you need to settle? Because a couple of generations ago, when options for women were much more limited, let's be very gender stereotypical about this, a lot of women had to settle because they had no other choice. But now men and women, they have many more choices. They have many more ways of getting their emotional needs met. And that's what seems to be happening. Do you think more women have to settled than men, Lucy?

Not necessarily, because I think there is, thankfully, a rewriting of the script as to what men should do and women should do. But I think at the same time, it is because of something that Eve said in terms of the emotional maturity that some men might be kind of a little bit behind women on that front, but that is partly society's fault. We are pretty rubbish at encouraging young boys, teenage boys, to really be. be in touch with their feelings without laughing at that. And men really, really fear being vulnerable, being laughed at, being ridiculed. And so they go into their shell. We talk about men going

into their caves. But there's almost an anthropological reason for that is that they're not, they're still not expected to be emotionally astute. And not all men, as I have to keep adding with this. But I was wondering, Eve, because, you know, some of what you talked about is, you talked about, you know, ambition or success. But it seemed to be to be very much in terms of financial success or career ambition when there was a subpar or a mismatch in a relationship. It's more than that though, right? It is absolutely more than that. It's not just about how much money one person earns or how professionally successful they are. But I guess it was an interesting element of the findings when I was researching the book was that the women who were more professionally successful than their other

halves seemed to be more likely to be in this kind of situation where their male partner was really harboring resentment that they didn't feel that they could talk about. And I think, you know, it comes in in lots of different ways. Like one woman I interviewed was an extremely successful solicitor and her husband was also very successful in his own right. But really, you know, the end of the relationship came because he felt that he needed a certain type of adoration that she couldn't give him. And so he ended up kind of straying away with much younger women. I mean, it's a kind of cliche story, who were very much at the beginning of their career and sort of looked up to him as this like, you know, very professionally astute person, which he wouldn't have

got from his partner because she was very much at the top of her game. Eve Simmons and Lucy Beresford. Miss Marple and Poirot have been household names for decades, but now one of Agatha Christie's lesser-known sleuths, Lady Eileen Bundle Brent, is finally getting her time in the spotlight. The fearless young amateur detective is the focus of a new Netflix mystery series, Seven Diles, and our next guest, Mia McKenna Bruce, is the award-winning actor bringing Bundle to the screen.

Based on Christie's 1929 novel, the Seven Diles mystery, it said Lady Eileen, who is affectionately known as Bundle, shared many qualities with the author herself. Well, Mia joined Nula in the Woman's Hour studio this week, but first, here's a taster of Mia in action as Bundle, as she encounters Superintendent Battle, played by Martin Freeman, just after launching herself out of a window and down some ivy in the middle of the night. What are you doing out here? Ensuring that no one is about who shouldn't be. May I ask what you were doing out here?

Me? Yes, you do you normally exit buildings via the window? Uh, it depends on the building. I was looking for the West Terrace. Oh, the West Terrace? Mm-hmm. Well, the West Terrace is my purview. So may I encourage you to return to bed? And when I say encourage, you may take that as a direct instruction or order.

Should that be more effective? Mia, welcome to Women's Hour. Thank you so much for having me. How gorgeous! to watch and I'm wondering what it was like to play. So Bundle or Lady Eileen. I think I'm going to call her Bundles. Yeah, yeah, you have to.

It's 1920s, it's the whole costume, the big country house. I actually saw that the styling was based on the supermodels of the 90s in a way. Yeah. Rossed with the 20s. Yeah, they were. The dress that we first meet Bundle in that she's wearing. Okay, let's describe it. Oh, I mean, everyone on set was describing it as liquid.

gold. Like it was like the way that it moved was just glorious. And you know those things that you put on and you're like, I actually feel really great. It was one of those and it was like, there wasn't much to it in that it was very effortless which is something that we loved because that is bundled. She's effortless

and people are just drawn to her and that's kind of what this dress said in that opening when we first meet her. Yeah, I know. It's resplendent and we'll remind you of other books perhaps like the Great Gatsby etc. and those very glamorous parties just to give people an idea of what they're in for. But indeed, speaking about bundle, one party goer where she's wearing the liquid

gold dress says, isn't she just it? And she has a lot of these qualities that makes her an it girl despite being written 100 years ago. Yeah, absolutely. Because she's ahead of her time, you know, as Agatha Christie was. And she's refusing to be put in a box, particularly the one that society wants to place her in at that time. And what I love about her is that even though she's always forward moving. She's like, it's never about kind of treading on other people on her way up, you know, she's got a huge heart. She's decent. Yeah, she's a good egg. And she, yeah, she's like, everyone come along with me and join me on this journey kind of thing, you know. She's a, she's a, she's a radiator, which I love about. She also, I felt when I was watching, she's the only

one that I can trust. Yeah, yes, we do learn that. Everybody else, I was kind of like, are they a friend or are they a foe? Classic Agatha Christie. We don't know who to trust. us apart from our bundle. Isn't that lovely though that parts of bundle, you know, were considered to be based on Agatha Christie herself? Yeah, it's crazy because it was one of Agatha Christie's earliest books and it hasn't been done a lot, which kind of fascinates me because, you know, she is this really exciting young sleuth. Agatha Christie was like the first woman to stand up on a surfboard and stuff like that. So adventure was in her, you know, and I'm guessing, you know, the thing of like she went missing and she's never like felt the need to justify what

happened there or where she went, Agatha Christie in real life. And I just think that's bundle as well. Like she doesn't need to explain herself. Adventure is definitely one of the words that comes to mind. And I'm just laughing. I'm just thinking back to your driving or bundles driving. Yeah, you can laugh at that. You can laugh at that. She is wonderful. But she had an energy, I suppose, when actually women, there was a lot of freedoms they didn't have. They didn't have the vote for instance, which is referenced in the script. But I want to move on to some of your co-stars. Now, where you're

sitting right now, Helena Bonham Carter has sat a number of times. What a woman. What a woman. She's your on-screen mother in this. And I'm just wondering what it was like working with her. Oh, a dream come true. Honestly, she is everything you could

hope for and more. It felt like we'd known each other forever. Our energies are just very similar and she really took really good care of me and we kind of we called ourselves sisters as opposed to mother and daughter because our characters you know bundles sometimes steps into the mum role more than lady catering does and as people we just yeah we we we just rift off each other and it was just absolutely glorious to get to do that with her and i know you've been acting a very long time as well but was there anything that you learned from her on set oh so much the main thing i've taken away from helena is she

has like a snack basket. Always. She was like, it's so important for us to have energy at all times. So she has like a proper wicker basket with like dried mango, Coca-Cola, like all of these things that give her energy. And I was like, oh my God, of course. Because you do reach that point on set because that I was obviously mad. You reach that point where you're like, I can't like I'm struggling to pull some energy

from somewhere. Particularly, you know, bundle was in every scene and quite energetic scenes. And then I was like, of course, this makes so much sense. So I've taken that with me. You won BAFTA's Rising Star Award in 2024. That was a big breakthrough role for you in how to have sex. I suppose when I say breakthrough, I mean that as an adult actor because many people will know you from Tracy Beaker, the dumping ground.

Really, you were an actor from 10 to 18 in those roles. Yeah, that I did for eight years in total, played the same character from 10 to 18. I'd done a few jobs before that as well. and kind of acting then compared to acting now as an adult is like two completely different worlds. I'm sure and so it should be I guess as well. But what was that transition like?

And I'm wondering was it difficult for people to take you seriously as an adult actor when they'd seen you, you know what I mean? Yeah, absolutely. And probably with pigtails as T. Taylor. Exactly that, exactly that. And also I look young for my age as well. So it was like to everybody else, I was still very much a child.

And, you know, I'd been on this far. fast-paced set for a really long time. So I could navigate a set like the back of my hand. But when it came to kind of auditioning as an adult, when cast directors and directors and writers would kind of ask about what you thought about the character or the script, I had absolutely no idea how to approach that. I don't know how to do that.

I played the same character for eight years. It was kind of, you know, we were 10 years old when we started that. So she kind of became a version of myself. Yes. And I was like, I can tell you about lighting. I don't know. And also it was this real safety that we had like pretty much the same crew, pretty much the same cast for eight years. So then going off and doing things that we didn't know anyone anymore was really, really scary.

And I put too much pressure on myself. And I ended up leaving the industry entirely when I was 18 and taking a bit of a break. And then kind of came back and kind of started again as an adult. How amazing, they're very courageous to do that. Yeah, I think I can look back and appreciate that now. At the time, it didn't feel courageous. It did definitely feel like there was a part of me that was like, okay, maybe I've done it, you know? Maybe I've done the thing that I set out to do.

I've been very lucky I'd been working for like 10 years by the age of 18. I was like, maybe that's my acting career over. But then taking that break, I realised there's nothing else in the world I wanted to do. Mia McKenna Bruce, speaking to Nula there, and all three episodes of Agatha Christie's Seven Diles are available to watch on Netflix now. That's it from me. Join Nula on Monday when her guests will include the Grammy Award-winning American R&B, singer-songwriter and actress, Andrea Day.

She was only the second black woman to win a golden globe for her portrayal of Billy Holiday. She'll be talking about her latest role in the film, Is This Thing On, in which two couples contemplate their marriages? I'll leave you with that thought. Until the next time. That's all for today's woman's hour. Join us again next time.