Farid WELCOMEs YOU
I am thrilled to introduce myself as the new editor-in-chief of FARID. I’m Lily-May, and over the past three years, I’ve had the pleasure of writing for FARID while studying at university. Before diving into this issue, I want to acknowledge the incredible teams I’ve had the honour of working with over the years. I am conscious that I have some big shoes to fill, and I hope to do them justice. FARID was born from the minds of students, offering us a platform for creative freedom that aims to inspire not just ourselves but our readers as well. With that in mind, my team and I wanted to create an issue of FARID that does just that… Introducing “The Controversial Issue.” This edition is designed to shine a light on the topics that society often censors or labels as taboo. Even in today’s modern world, there are still subjects that are avoided, despite their impact on our daily lives. From fashion to mental health, this issue of FARID aims to create a platform that is both authentic and realistic. We hope it resonates with you as deeply as it does with us. The team and I hope you enjoy the read!
Lily-May x
Photography by Jessica Galgey
THE FARID TEAM
Editor In Chief
Lily-May Broadhead
ASSISTANT EDITORS
Emily Olive
Ella Gardner
Web Editor
Bethan Croft
Design DIRECTOR
Ella Gardner
Cover Designers
Alex Williamson
Tommy Onofre
Writers
Naomi Newman
Matt Joiner
Iona Leaf
Alex Day
Pahki Dixit
Bethan Croft
Amy Woodward
Social Media Director
Emily Olive
Social Media Team
Millie Barlow
Bethan Croft
colleen hoover
donald trump
The 40 year old
A Christian girl’s worst nightmare
By Iona Leaf
Oh sex! How
I wish I could have you…
Alas! I have to fucking wait for someone to come along and fucking fuck me, but only once we’re fucking married.
I promise I’m not going to Bible-bash all over you. I also promise I’m not about to slut-shame anyone who isn’t waiting ‘till marriage, believe me, I am well aware I’m part of the minority right now. I can’t make it any clearer that all of my thoughts and opinions relate only to how I feel about myself – the rest of you guys can get it girrrrrl!
Now that the ice has been completely obliterated, let’s ask The Big Questions:
Why am I waiting?
It’s important to note that I am a practising Christian, as if my appalling language wasn’t enough of a clue. Don’t look to me as a role model, I’m clearly not perfect. So the obvious answer to why i’m waiting is because God tells me to fear and guilt. Will God strike me down and kill me for fornicating? No. Will I go to hell? Umm, I hope not. Am I willing to test this theory? Also, no. “But why wait?” I hear you ask. “It’s just sex, it isn’t that deep.” Correct, it is just sex…but not for me. I believe sex is that deep (don’t!) I believe that it’s a personal and intimate experience. One that I’m only willing to share with one person, my future spouse. So in that sense, I am pretty committed to waiting. Now, I’ve spent HOURS searching
for loopholes and biblical contradictions trying to find someone who would tell me that actually, I can go ahead and just do it because, actually, God was in a silly goofy mood and wanted to test us all. No such luck, sadly. Did I actually conduct this thorough research using the original source AKA, The Bible? No. Too long. Too boring. Old Testament God is not a vibe. Jesus, unhelpfully, didn’t talk about it. Regardless, everywhere I looked told me the same thing: Sex is for marriage; your body is a temple; you’re a whorish Jezebel for even thinking about sex blah blah blah. This kind of thing, always aimed at women by the way, is unfortunately not uncommon. There are far too many misogynistic, and quite frankly, terrifying, fragile men’s blogs that do ▶
that do an excellent job at enhancing and enabling the many misconceptions people have about Christianity. These men have disgusting views on women’s bodies, women’s place in society, and women’s right to exist, but then claim that they are just “spreading the word of God.” It’s repulsive.
Unfortunately, the liberal websites I also looked at generally told me the same thing about sex before marriage. I should wait *ugh.* And so after countless teary nights (yes, finding out that I’m really not allowed to have sex before marriage did actually
That fricking car metaphor!
“You wouldn’t buy a car before you test-drive it!” Well, it’s a good thing I’m not a car. Nor is the person I hope to marry one day!
I hate to break it to you, but if your first reaction upon hearing someone tell you something deeply personal, deeply rooted in their Faith, and possibly embarrassing, is to tell them that their choice about their sexlife (or lack thereof) is weird and not worth it, you are not helping, and you are not being kind.
The problem with Purity culture:
man who professes to speak the word of God, that has ever equated a woman’s worth with her “purity” or “innocence” or “virginity.”
Whenever I think about the toxicity of purity culture, I’m reminded of the quote: “If you consider a woman less pure after you’ve touched her, maybe you should take a look at your hands.” I personally wouldn’t let any creepy, leering, woman-hating preacher touch me with a 10-foot bargepole.
Despite going to a CofE (really not a Bible-basher never presented with actually, and so Purity culture. media, every fragile little
I do not believe my worth is tied up in my virginity, because that’s just ridiculous. And, fair warning I’m about to Bible-bash, anyone telling young girls this, clearly learnt nothing from Jesus’ teaching.
There is such a double standard when it comes to purity and virginity, but that’s a whole other conversation that some men aren’t ready for.
How has this affected my relationship with my body?
Ok, I’m going to warn you now that it’s about to get a lot more TMI so just skip ahead if
you aren’t already uncomfortable. Ok, here goes…
We’ve established I can’t have sex, not shocking. What is shocking (apparently, to most people when I tell them) is that I’m not allowed to have a wand or a rabbit either. So I hope you can all appreciate the struggle now. And it is a struggle, one that isn’t nearly talked about enough. And one that is completely normal.
The difficult thing is that being told you shouldn’t have sex until you’re married, and being told you aren’t allowed to engage in self-pleasure, ever, makes it incredibly difficult for one to have a healthy relationship with one’s body. There have been a number of studies on the health benefits, mentally and physically, of doing *that.* I guess I’ll never know.
I conditioned myself to think that it was wrong,
my body. Even if it was simply to check my breasts for lumps. Or my vagina for tampon insertion (shock horror, at 20 years old, I still only use pads). I never even wanted to look at my body when going through the notable changes during puberty. It made me feel dirty and uncomfortable, and as a result, I’m not nearly as secure in my skin as I should be.
Judgy-judgy
I’m painfully aware how hypocritical this next part is about to sound considering how disgusting and hateful so-called “Christians” can be. That being said, I have never, and will never judge anyone who chooses not to wait until marriage. Truth be told, I’m actually jealous, and as I said at the start, I’m part of the minority here.
The 40-year-old virgin
Well, I’m halfway there! And with not a future spouse in sight, it looks like it’s just me and my smutty novels (I want no high and mighty criticism of this – I can read what I bloody well want to read) against the world!
I just never expected to receive so much judgement for my choice to wait. It’s not funny, and it’s not helpful, and it doesn’t make my choice any easier. It’s a constant weight on my mind whether I will or won’t wait; dare I say it’s my Roman Empire. And it’s an incredibly isolating experience.
Does distance really make the heart grow fonder?
Exploring the challenges of distance in relationships and positive outlooks on the art of loving from afar.
In my late teens, I always thought a long-distance relationship would be ideal for me. I liked the idea of seeing someone for a short while and then having my own space again. It sounded like the perfect balance: you get the best of both worlds – the intimacy and companionship of a relationship, but also the freedom and independence of being on your own. Back then, I genuinely believed that this setup would suit me. I’d tell anyone who’d listen that I was one of those people who needed my space, and that distance would only enhance the connection.
But now that I’m in my early twenties, things look a little different. I’ve come to realise that people who think long-distance is ideal might not be with the right person, or maybe haven’t yet experienced the emotional toll it can take. Don’t get me wrong, distance does have its moments of clarity and perspective. It’s true that being apart from someone can make you miss and appreciate them more
when you finally get to spend time together. But in my experience, the reality of maintaining a relationship from afar can be exhausting, both physically and emotionally.
So, the real question is: does distance really make the heart grow fonder?
From speaking to friends, I’ve learnt that opinions are divided. Some say it gets easier because the distance becomes routine. The first six months or so can be incredibly tough, as your relationship has to adapt to a new rhythm. You go from seeing each other regularly to relying on technology to fill the gaps. But after that adjustment period, many say long-distance relationships can settle into a new normal, where the separation doesn’t feel as painful. You both adjust your expectations, plan trips to see each other, and find new ways to stay connected. The key, according to them, is communication, trust, and having a clear plan for the future – whether that’s closing the distance or continuing to
make it work from afar. The argument for longdistance working is that it teaches you to value the time you do spend together. Because it’s so rare, you make more of an effort when you’re physically together. You plan special dates, trips, or activities, making every visit feel more meaningful. It’s also said that distance forces you to build a stronger emotional connection, as you’re relying purely on communication. Some friends claim that because you’re not physically together all the time, you learn to talk more openly and honestly, which strengthens the relationship in the long run.
Personally, though, I’m not so sure it’s always that straightforward. In my experience, being apart can amplify insecurities and doubts. When you’re with someone day-to-day, you can talk things through, solve issues in real time, and offer each other comfort. But when you’re separated by distance, small misunderstandings can grow into larger problems. It’s easy to feel isolated when ▶
something goes wrong, or when you’re having a tough day, and the person you need most is miles away. There’s no immediate comfort, no hug at the end of a stressful day. Over time, that can start to wear on you.
And then there’s the practical side of it. Longdistance relationships often involve a lot of juggling. You have to coordinate schedules, even deal with different time zones, and work around work or university commitments. Add travel costs and the emotional strain of being apart, and it’s not surprising that some relationships struggle to survive the distance. Even the strongest emotional connection can be tested by these ongoing challenges.
That said, I’m still an optimist. I believe that with the right person, distance doesn’t have to be the end of the road. It requires patience, trust, and a lot of effort – perhaps even more so than a traditional relationship –but it’s not impossible. I’ve seen long-distance relationships work for others, and I’ve spoken to enough people to know that it can get better over time. The early months are tough, yes, but if you can find a rhythm that works for both of you, it’s possible to make it through to the other side. However, not every relationship can cope with the strain of being apart. For some, the distance becomes a wedge that’s impossible to remove.
So, does distance really make the heart grow fonder?
The answer, I think, depends on the relationship. Distance can certainly enhance your appreciation for your partner, but it can also expose cracks that might not have been obvious before. Some people thrive with the space and time apart, while others struggle to maintain a connection without the physical presence of their partner. At the end of the day, if you’re with the right person, distance might just make your heart grow fonder. But if you’re not, it’s likely to remind you just how far apart you truly are.
By Lily-May Broadhead
OPINION ON :
Colleen Hoover and Romanticising Toxic Relationships
Giorgia Caso shares her opinion on best-selling author, Colleen Hoover’s, controversial topics that her books include – Questioning whether they are harmful or create meaningful conversations in media .
When talking about controversies, many authors come to my mind, in particular Colleen Hoover.
Last August, ‘It Ends With Us’ was adapted to the big screen which caught lots of attention from the wider public. The film opened a new discussion about what is wrong/right with the book and in consequence, the film too. Glamour, The Week, The New York Times, Elle and many other magazines wrote about this controversy, showing the importance of speaking up and talking about it. According to Forbes, the film ‘It Ends With Us’ made $197,388,816 all around the world. The popularity of it is another reason for everyone to raise the issues it involves.
Colleen Hoover’s novels have been circulating ‘BookTok’ and ‘Bookstagram’ for the last few years, escalating the bestsellers lists of most magazines and platforms. But what is it that makes her such a
controversial writer? It is beyond dispute that the novel, ‘It Ends With Us’ in particular, has been successful since its release in 2016 –selling 10 million copies worldwide, but the question still remains.
What if I told you that most of her books are about sensitive subjects, violence or even abuse, just to mention a few – which would need trigger warnings – and she doesn’t mention it on the first page?
The film has had the decency to warn their audience about those trigger warnings. In the novel, however, there is not a single hint until you get to the scene where the main character witnesses her mother being hit by her dad.
The main aspect of the controversy is her readership in relation to the subject of her books. Her principal readers are framed within the age of thirteen to twenty – especially young teenagers who are developing, are growing up with her novels. It doesn’t seem to be a problem until you realise what they are
understanding from it. It seems to be okay to be attracted to a guy who kicks a chair – as being just the first sign of a long journey with anger issues that often end up in violent acts.
It is also normal to romanticise abuse, according to Colleen Hoover, because otherwise she would have deepened her characters and raised her readers’ awareness of the situation from the start. It is true that most people who are involved in similar situations, might think that it is normal until they talk about it to loved ones. As an adult reader, it can be easier to spot the differences between what is normal and what isn’t but as teenagers who are still experiencing their first times, it can be tricky.
The film based on the novel ‘It Ends With Us’ seems to be more sensitive and aware of its dangers. In fact, it is 15+ and there are trigger warnings even before it begins. The director and actor, Justin Baldoni has talked about it and his research behind it. As he told CBS Morning: “If this could affect me in
this way, then I can only imagine what it could do for women and people who are in this situation all over the world.”
What is controversial about Colleen Hoover is also the merchandising and publicity of her novel and consequent film. When the book was firstly published, she chose to launch a nail polish brand along with it. In a way, it shows that her book is about ‘girly stuff’ and it is romantic – there is no denying that there is romance in the story but is it a nice romance? I personally wouldn’t say so and I know many other people would agree with me.
When the film came out, the main actress Blake Lively chose to launch her hair products brand: the question seems to pop up quite naturally. Why do the main actress and the author choose to make profit out of it instead of raising awareness around domestic abuse and giving help about those who find themselves in critical situations?
In the meantime, Justin Baldoni has been on different shows and
given interviews where he confesses to have been very sensible about finding out more on domestic abuse and ways to help those who need it.
As a witness to the kind of controversy this author represents, her fans and haters are two very active entities and often there’s no in between.
According to Vox, ‘Hoover’s subject matter is heavy, but her writing style is bubbly and fun. The contrast is weird.’
This shows the deep distinction that lies within Hoover’s books, dividing readers. Some love her and others hate her.
The plots of her novels are deeply romanticised which raise lots of questions as the subjects often are more serious. The same aspects of her novels that fans love, her
haters hate, such as the easy reading that her books present. I read the book a few years ago and I was rather disappointed because of the light tone with which Hoover talks about serious issues. This year, I also watched the film because I think Justin Baldoni is more thoughtful and I have also seen a few interviews in which he explains his intentions with this movie. On the whole, I reckon that it is better than the actual book for raising awareness.
The controversy still remains and can be further discussed but we need to better navigate the fine line between entertainment and awareness, encouraging narratives to inform and empower rather than romanticise and obscure.
By Giorgia Caso
THE GENETIC
UNDERCLASS
Balancing Innovation with Fairness in Healthcare
By Pakhi Rajesh Kumar Dixit
As advances in genetic testing reshape medicine, society faces a crucial question: Could these technologies, designed to improve health, create a genetic underclass?
Genetic data holds the power to predict everything from Cancer to Alzheimer’s, but when used by insurers, it raises concerns about fairness. Will individuals be penalized for their biology? How can we balance innovation with equity in a world where genetic information is increasingly commodified?
Genetic testing allows patients to uncover their predispositions to various diseases, offering personalized healthcare like never before. This
revolution in medicine empowers individuals to manage their health, but it also carries risks. When insurers gain access to genetic information, they may use it to increase premiums, deny coverage, or exclude people from insurance products altogether.
Take the United States as an example. The Genetic Information
Non-discrimination Act (GINA) was passed in 2008 to prevent health insurers from using genetic data to discriminate. But GINA has significant gaps — it does not cover life, disability, or long-term care insurance.
A person with a genetic predisposition to cancer or heart disease may still face inflated costs or exclusion from these insurance markets. As
genetic testing becomes more common, the potential for genetic discrimination increases, exacerbating inequality.
Globally, other countries face similar challenges. The UK prohibits insurers from using genetic test results to discriminate under the Code on Genetic Testing and Insurance. However, this protection is limited. For conditions like Huntington’s disease, insurers can still use genetic information if the coverage exceeds a certain threshold (£500,000 for life insurance) – creating a two-tiered system.
In Australia, the situation is even more concerning. While the Australian government has issued guidelines for the use of genetic information in insurance, insurers are
still allowed to deny or limit coverage based on genetic test results. A report from the Centre for Genetics Education found that individuals with a predisposition to conditions such as breast cancer or neurological disorders, could face significant barriers to life and disability insurance. These gaps in regulation create a reality where people may avoid testing out of fear that their genetic data will be used against them, preventing early detection and intervention.
The commercialisation of genetic data adds further complexity. Companies like 23andMe and AncestryDNA have built vast genetic databases that are often sold or partnered with pharmaceutical companies. While consumers gain insights into their ancestry and health, they may not fully understand how their data will be used.
With insurers and corporations eager to mine this information for profit, individuals risk becoming mere data points in a system that rewards genetic privilege and punishes those with vulnerabilities. However, individuals are not powerless in this situation. There are everal steps they can take to protect themselves from the potential misuse of their genetic information:
1. Limit Data Sharing
2. Purchase Insurance
3. Stay Informed About Legal Protections:
4. Use Anonymous Testing Services:
5. Advocate for Stronger Regulations
To prevent the emergence of a genetic underclass, stronger protections are needed. In the UK and Australia, regulatory frameworks must evolve to cover all
forms of insurance, as seen in parts of Europe. In the U.S., GINA must be expanded to provide comprehensive coverage. Public awareness is also key — individuals must understand how their genetic information is used and the potential risks of sharing it.
A fair healthcare system should empower individuals regardless of their genetic predispositions. Without strong safeguards, genetic testing could deepen social divides, creating a future where our DNA determines not just our health but our place in society. Balancing innovation with fairness is critical to ensuring that genetic data remains a tool for better health –rather than a means of exclusion.
The controversy of
DONALD TRUMP
Opinion On :
For the first time a convicted felon has been made president-elect of the United States. Donald Trump won the 2024 presidential election, in what can be considered a landslide victory, not only winning both the popular and electoral vote but also winning the senate and house of representatives giving him a trifecta of power. This alongside the conservative leaning supreme court could mean it is a lot easier for Republicans to pass legislature and court rulings to be made in their favour.
On top of this, Trump is only the second president to serve non-consecutive terms in office, the first being Grover Cleveland who served in 1884 and
1892. Whilst it could be argued that Cleveland and Trump are opposites of each other in terms of politics, one was a Democrat, and the other is a Republican, being the only two presidents to serve non-consecutive terms is not the only way these two men are similar.
Controversy surrounds both men’s presidential appointment. But it is clear that out of the two, Trump is the one that holds the crown for the most controversial presidential appointee.
So, what is it that makes Trump such a controversial candidate?
Throughout the 20172021 presidential term a lot of criticism was made about Trump from his
politicising of the justice department (something that shouldn’t take place due to the separation of powers) to personalising the presidency by loyalty rather than the constitution. However, these criticisms reached a boiling point in February 2020 with Trump’s first impeachment for trying to get Ukraine to aid his re-election campaign by withholding military funds from them. This first impeachment was followed less than a year later with a second impeachment, this time for inciting an insurrection, following the Capitol Hill Riots on January 6th, 2021.
Only a year and a half after leaving office (November 2022) Trump announced his intention▶ ▶
to run in the 2024 presidential election after winning a landslide victory in the Iowa Republican Caucus. His re-election campaign was full of controversy, bur arguable one of the biggest points for contention was the legal challenges that faced. These include: four criminal indictments from 2023, a civil investigation into the Trump organisation, 34 felony counts for falsifying business records and interference in the 2016 election including payment to Stormy Daniels (who he also had an affair with), and a case into interference in the 2020 election and 11,000 stolen classified documents. Now, most of these cases have been dropped due to Trump’s landslide re-election on November 5th 2024, with a supreme court ruling in the summer stating Trump could not be prosecuted for any “official acts” undertaken while he was president.
During the 2024 campaign multiple false and misleading statements were made, most famously during the presidential debate on September 10th when Trump claimed Haitian immigrants in Springfield,
Ohio was eating dogs and cats.
There were numerous false claims made throughout the campaign many of which were said repeatedly. If we look at some of the rallies did in the few days before November 5th claims include:
Democrats supporting the execution of babies after birth as a form of abortion. This false claim started in April 2024 when Trump posted a video on truth social and expressed his views on abortion laws and how they should be left to the individual states to decide.
21 million migrants had come to the United States under the Biden Administration with 13,099 of these being murderers. In actual fact under 11 million migrants came to the United States under the Biden administration and even with the estimated 2 million migrants who went undetected, the estimated number would be around 13 million – not the 21 million Trump had been claiming. Additionally, the statistic regarding 13,099 murderers entering the country is a figure from the last decade which
covers both the Trump and Biden administration, the figure also represents those in federal, state, and local prisons.
He also claims that on the day he left office, the USA had the lowest illegal immigration in the country history, a claim he uses a chart to display with an arrow supposedly pointing at the day he left office. In actual fact the arrow points in April 2020, eight months before Trump left office.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) were not in North Carolina dealing with the affects Hurricane Helene caused when it made landfall in late September. In fact, on October 16th FEMA pledged $100 million in aid to North Carolina and the following week on October 25th more than 1,700 staff had been deployed to help residents.
Governments across the world were releasing prisoners early, figures show that the prison population across the world has increased by 22 million people. This is a claim that even Trump’s team struggled to justify.
This by no means scratches the surface of the false claims Trump made throughout his campaign, for context during his presidency between 2017 and 2021 Washington Post fact checkers calculated 30,573 false claims, which is an average of 21 false claims a day.
False claims were not the only thing Trump promoted during his campaign; on his platform Truth Social, he pushed 330 conspiracy theories. Each one of these conspiracies has something in common – they are all related to a plot against the former president. The most prominent of these theories is that the FBI orchestrated or ordered the assassination attempts on Trump whilst on the campaign trail. 75% of these conspiracies came directly from Trump’s account, 25% were reposted by him.
During the one presidential debate he had with Vice President Kamala Harris, it was clear that Trump had no respect for her; his language was seen as racist, misogynistic, dehumanising, and sexual in nature. The most obvious example of this is the fact Trump won’t
pronounce Harris’ name correctly and changes it regularly. He has also questioned her racial identity, made fun of her laugh, and called her “lazy,” “slow” and described her as having a “low IQ.”
Controversy also stemmed from the policies that Trump was standing to be re-elected on. One of the biggest issues of the election was immigration. The plan to deport up to 20 million undocumented migrates through mass deportation. This plan has legal, financial and political challenges, most notably increasing inflation and undercutting financial growth. Trump has said he will build detention centres and engage the military in aiding his plans. Texas officials have recently pledged a 1400acre ranch to Trump to help deportation that could see up to four million families split up.
and has been sceptical of NATO in the past; the post-World War two transatlantic treaty set up in defence against the Soviet Union. But whether Trump will stop the war or withdraw America from NATO is a different question entirely.
Trump has also said he will terminate the department of education, introduce anti-LGBTQ policies and replace the affordable care act. All of these policy ideas give the impression that American nationalism will only increase in the next four years turning America in to an isolation nation.
As of this moment it is unclear exactly what will happen in the next few years, but a lot of American citizens seem to be taking the stance that they have been through a lot in the last 20 years alone, not to mention Trump’s first
Women on workplace struggles
By Bethan Croft
Before 1918, women in the UK weren’t allowed to vote. Before 1961, married women didn’t have access to contraceptive pills. Before 1970, women weren’t entitled to the same pay as men for working the same job. Now in 2024, women are being treated with more equality than they have ever been. However, despite it being almost 50 years since the enforcement of the Sexual Discrimination Act 1975 (later replaced by the Equality Act 2010)
many women have reported unfair treatment in the workplace.
I spoke with three women from very different career backgrounds – the media, automotive sector and the military – and they shared their experiences as females working in a maledominated industry.
Alison Smith worked for many years at a major media organisation. It was during her first ever job interview for this exact company, back in the early ‘90s,
that she was asked whether she was taking contraceptives. She said, “They asked me at the end if I had any questions and I said ‘no.’ They said, ‘we’ve got a question for you: Are you on the pill?’”
Alison remembers being quite shocked at their audacity to ask a 21-year-old such a “private and personal question,” but she admits that she answered it because “I really wanted the job.” Once she responded, she questioned their motive. They told her
that a lot of women they had hired in the past fell pregnant quite quickly and as a company they “couldn’t afford for that to happen again.”
that a lot of women they had hired in the past fell pregnant quite quickly and as a company they “couldn’t afford for that to happen again.”
For Alison, she is often more shocked now than she was at the time. “I suppose, I find it more comforting knowing that it wouldn’t ever be allowed now. I mean, nowadays, there are many guidelines you have to follow and during my job, I had to interview a lot of people and follow those guidelines. Now, the media would know that you’d done it.”
She acknowledged that the same question would never have been posed to a man, “Would they ever have asked a man ‘are you using condoms?’ Of course they wouldn’t have!” Alison is aware that if she told the interviewers she wasn’t using contraceptives then she wouldn’t have gotten the job. She said, “I was [on the pill] but, actually, I think even if I wasn’t I would’ve said yes because I knew that’s what they wanted.”
Alison had been living at home at the time and said that when she told her parents they had been so shocked that they wanted her to complain, “Of course, I didn’t because I wanted the job, and I wouldn’t have got it if I complained!”
Despite all of this, she does hold a small amount of sympathy for small organisations, but for larger corporations
“They asked me if I was on the pill… it was my first job interview.”
this kind of behaviour is unacceptable. Alison doesn’t believe that the intention of the question was “malicious” and she says she understands where they were coming from – “it is hard work having to find new employees when someone goes on maternity leave and I think they were just wanted to save themselves from the frustration.” But, overall, “it was one of those things that seemed to
encourage sexism in the workplace.”
At the time, Alison never had the chance to confirm whether other women were being treated the same, it was an almost taboo topic, but she said, “I kind of had to assume that it was happening to other women too, as I saw them going to the same interviews as I had, in the same place.”
Luckily for Alison, an experience like this has never again happened since but she says that even today “I have been in job interviews that were all led by a male majority. You don’t see many women in those roles still.”
This is something that has stuck with Alison for over 30 years because she knows, “if it happened now, the people who had been on that interview panel would have been fired.” But, the excuse of ‘back then being such a different time’ is quite frankly poor and overused in a manner of covering up wrongdoings.
Alison said, “People often say that kind of thing was to be expected ▶
back then. But when I first went into the profession it was a big shock. It was all male, all the managers were male, a lot of the junior staff were female. But it was a culture where you had to be quite strong because you were up against men… and I was one of the only women.”
Alongside this, Alison talked of other concerns she had within her workplace and how there was quite a big culture around alcohol. It was very much “a part of the profession”, most editors had a place where they kept booze in their office and every lunchtime people would go to the pub. She said, “That was just the way it was… I can’t really identify the moment where it all began to change.”
However, it was certainly quite a big issue for heavy alcoholism to be acceptable during working hours. Alison said, “If you put alcohol and a very bad environment together around a few young women, it becomes a very tricky situation. There were lots of incidents where female
employees got pestered quite a bit. It was just accepted that you had to put up with it.”
For Sara Fleyfell, being ignored was a big part of her experience of working with men.
She worked for a small business in the automative sector about eight or nine years ago, where she was the only woman. Out of all of the members of staff that she worked with; it was her main employer that treated her the worst – often ignoring and belittling her, “He talked to me a lot differently than he did to other members of staff.” It was quite typical for the other staff members to talk to the males she worked with whilst completely disregarding her presence. She also recalled how her employer would clap his hands at her when he needed her to do something.
After working there for 18 months, Sara was made redundant via an evening WhatsApp message, but she “had started looking for another job after six months of working for them because I didn’t like the company culture.”
Sara was the only female at her workplace so feels she cannot comment on whether other women are being treated similarly elsewhere.
Maybe the fact that Sara was the only woman working at this branch says enough about the imbalance of equality in that particular workplace. Since leaving the job, Sara is happy to report that she has never experienced similar treatment elsewhere, but she is “concerned that it could still happened in the industries where there is a majority of men.”
Caroline worked in the military for more than 22 years and whilst more and more women are now working in what was once a historically male sector, she discussed how her gender was often put above her ability. She said, “Whilst working in Iraq, I was meant to go out on armed convoy – I was the only girl in the sector at the time and of the Army Sergeants refused to take me. Once he found out I
was detailed to be on the convoy he said, ‘I’m not taking her!’ I tried to make it lighthearted and asked if it was because I was RAF or because I was a girl.”
His response was, “Girls can’t handle weapons like we do.”
For Caroline, the situation was almost amusing as she had been in the RAF for at least 15 years at this point and she said, “That was probably longer than what he had served!” Nevertheless, she was still able to go on convoy as her boss insisted that her presence was vital, “I had high clearance and was needed on the squad.”
Joining the military at the age of 17, Caroline was able to train to be combatant, allowing her to be gun trained. However, she mentioned that “Women who had joined a few years before, weren’t allowed to be combatant, only men were able to, but they relaxed the rules and changed it so that it became a part of basic training.”
When she first joined in 1986, you had to sign an initial contract for
nine years, “If you fell pregnant within that time you had to leave.”
Caroline said, “There was a joke where those that didn’t want to be in the military anymore would mention they had missed their period or that they were pregnant.” But, for many it wasn’t just a joke or an easy way out, “I knew many women who lost their jobs because of this.”
Following the scandal, the UK Parliament released a statistic in 1994, stating that a total of £7,822,943 had so far been paid in compensation to women who were compulsorily discharged from the armed forces on grounds of pregnancy.
A change in law meant that you were no longer thrown out for being pregnant. Similarly, the military LGBT ban was lifted in the year 2000.
Whilst many organisations are beginning to comply with the changing times and many laws are being brought in place to provide equality, some mistreatment still goes unnoticed. Alison Smith says, “There has to be a line between your work and private life, and that line is yours to protect.”
A DEADLY DECLINE
“The first time I saw someone die I was 19 years old.”
Over 700,000 nurses are being more undervalued than ever, with their average salary bordering on embarrassing. Former NHS nurse Geraldine Parker is keen to highlightthe urgent change needed in this industry.
Parker giggles as the dreaded question is asked. “59, I lie to everyone about my age, but I haven’t lied to you this morning.”
With almost 40 years’ experience, Parker gives an inside perspective from her time in the NHS, at just nineteen years old. Moving from Ireland in the 80s to West London was a culture shock for Parker. “The hospital was called central Middlesex, it was quite a rough area. When I did my A&E placement there was things like stabbings, assaults. To come from rural Ireland to a place in London where you were looking after people who had been stabbed was completely alien to me.”
The nursing times reported that more than 40,000 nurses left the health service in 2022. Although this is for a multitude of reasons, a huge attributing factor is the standard that nurses are treated. “Oh God yes.” Parker laughs to herself, after asking if she ever considered leaving because of the way she was treated during her eight years in the health care service. “Thing is when you were a student nurse, you got all the horrible jobs. Of course, there was some senior staff that were lovely, but there were some who made it their life’s work to try and make your life as miserable as possible. They were horrible.”
Recalling how she spent her first year as student nurse, Parker cringes when revealing to me a normal day in the NHS. “My friend Maeve and I, we always laugh that we spent our first three wards together with most of that time spent crying in the sluice.” For anyone unfamiliar with what a sluice is, Parker informs it “was where you cleaned the bed pans and threw away the waste.”
The isolating feeling of working in such an intense environment isn’t a rarity for health care workers. However, Parker emphasises that the highlight of her experience was her co-workers, “I didn’t know a solitary soul, but the people who I met when I was training are the people who I’m still friends with today.”
The topic that has been at the forefront of conversation in relation to the NHS is not only its defunding by the government but its lack of pay for the hard-working staff. The average salary of an MP is, £86,000 per year. The average salary for an NHS nurse is £33,000. It is unbelievably disproportional. After asking Parker if she thought the pay was sufficient, she underlined the struggle that many nurses still face. “In my day the one saving grace was that you got free food, that really was so important, because we literally had no money. I remember my first month, I was £300 overdrawn, and my monthly income was £300.”
Although it has been more than a decade since Parker has worked for the health service she gets an insight from her friends still working for the NHS about its dramatic decline. “I mean you know, conditions were bad but you’re all in it together. When I hear from colleagues who are still in the NHS, it’s that it is 100 times worse than it was when we trained. We were never quiet when I worked in the NHS, but you always felt you could make a difference. From what I hear from my friends is, they’re firefighting.”
The imbalance of incredible work the NHS staff are providing, compared to their pay is inexcusable. Parker opens up about one of her first life changing experiences in the health service at just nineteen years old. “A senior nurse had asked me to sit with him, because he didn’t have any family and so I sat with him and held his hand and watched him die.” Parker continues sounding nostalgic of a time she will never forget. “I remember crying. I remember we were turning him over, to
wash his back and this sound came out of him and I thought he was alive. I started crying and then I started laughing, I wasn’t quite sure what I was feeling.” A bittersweet giggle leads her to tell me “I remember thinking he was alive, and just jumping back from the bed and thinking oh my God, It’s easter all over again.”
By Emily Olive
S lent suffering:
How the Men of Today Approach Talking about Their Feelings.
Whhen I was asked to write about mental health, more specifically men’s mental health, I will admit that I struggled immensely with writer’s block. As a subject that I have indulged my hours into before, I did not want to repeat the same, tired statistics that make no difference to a matter that we have so wrongly considered taboo. Just over a year ago, my own mental health dipped to the
lowest point that I have ever experienced. Together, we must break the stigma that surrounds men’s mental health issues, and I would like to use my own experiences to help further the message that men must speak up. December 2023. I had a phone call whilst on a work night out from my dad, telling me that after a long illness, my grandpa had passed away. Around two months earlier was a call that informed me of my Nan’s sudden passing. Balancing uni, a job that
I worked for at least 25-30 hours a week, gigging weekly with my band, and still making time for my girlfriend was starting to become draining. I had worked out that I wouldn’t have a day of doing nothing until February at the earliest. It wasn’t apparent to me at that point, but I was starting to become depressed.
Depression works its way through a person like an anaesthetic. It surrounds the brain, clouds your feelings and makes you numb to
everything positive that surrounds you. I would get home from my job, convinced that everyone around hated me, that my house despised me and wanted me gone. I have never been a sufferer of social anxiety, but I found myself unable to believe that anyone liked me. I was so desperate for some form of escape from how my life was going that I even tried moving house just for a different atmosphere. When that fell through, my escape plan turned darker. Thoughts of sadness turned to thoughts of helplessness. Thoughts of helplessness turned to thoughts of self-harm. Thoughts of self-harm turned to thoughts of suicide. Had I not had a mental breakdown one night, where I revealed everything to my girlfriend, I think things may have gone very differently.
And it is upon reflection of these events, as I look back on that time, that I realise just how important talking is. We all sit in circles and say “I’m always here, you can talk to me” - but how often do we truly mean it? How often does suffering fall upon
deaf ears and blind eyes? All the time.
And after going through this turmoil, this inner hatred and self-loathing, I can explicitly tell you why men are silent, why we choose to suffer rather than speak, what goes through our heads:
I didn’t think people would care. I didn’t want to bother them. I thought it was just me being stupid. I thought they would judge me for it. I didn’t want to look sad and bring the mood down. A thousand reasons and rationalisations just like these ran around my head for months on end, and in hindsight, I get it. I get why those ‘tired statistics’ exist. I get why 40% of men won’t talk about their mental health. I get why suicide is the leading killer in men under 50. I get why 29% of men won’t speak about their mental health because they are ‘too embarrassed.’
It’s a mindset. The stigma that we all so avidly want to destroy is no longer the primary enemy - it is the way in which men think that their feelings will be received. It is the
concept of masculinity. We are so frightened of showing any forms of weakness, due to a system that is reinforced through patriarchal notions, that constantly surround young men (looking at you, Andrew Tate). It is because of our mental block, that so desperately holds onto our fragile ideals of ‘dignity’, that we cannot begin to speak out about our problems.
We can all make a difference; we can all make the change. Let’s make an effort to show men that they can be upset, and that they can talk to anyone about how they are feeling and their personal struggles. Let’s destroy ‘masculinity’, forever.
By Matt Joiner
S
CONTROVERSY IN SPORT:
Where the lines are drawn
Sport has been a concept within human life since as early as 7000 BCE and within that time, there has been plenty of controversy alongside the crowning achievements of athletes.
One of, if not the most pressing issues in recent times in sports, is the introduction of performanceenhancing drugs (PEDs). Performance-enhancing drugs have been used in world sport more commonly in recent years and there are plenty of examples of athletes using banned and illegal substances to gain a competitive advantage. Here are some of the most highprofile cases:
1980s German Athletes:
In the 1970s and 80’s, the East German athletes were forced by their government to take PEDs, with the belief that the use of these drugs would prove to the world that the Communist ideology reigned supreme. Some of the swimmers even said to one another, ‘You eat the pills, or you die’; the athletes had no choice. The result of these steroids and PEDs led to the East Germany swim team winning 11/14 Gold medals and East Germany claiming 40 gold medals at the 1976
Montreal Olympics:
Over 9,000 athletes were thought to have taken the PEDs, and many were left with lifelong health issues such as heart disease, infertility, and cancer.
Diego Maradona: Argentinian football superstar Diego Maradona was widely regarded as one of the best players ever. However, in 1994 his superstar status was stripped away from him, as the creative midfielder tested positive for ephedrine and was banned from the 1994 World Cup. Ephedrine boosts the central nervous system and improves athletic performance alongside endurance. Maradona’s illustrious career would continue for a few years after, but ‘El Pelusa’ would never represent the Argentinian national team again.
Lance Armstrong:
American road racing cyclist is another who is guilty of using PEDs to gain a competitive advantage. He was once a seven-time consecutive Tour de
France winner and had an Olympic medal, until all of this was stripped away. Every member of the team was investigated and trainers, such as Pepe Marti, received lifetime bans from the sport. Armstrong was found guilty of using EPO, human growth hormone, diuretics, blood doping, and falsifying documents saying that he had passed drug tests. Armstrong was left disgraced and was given a lifetime ban and stripped of all the titles he had earned since August 1st, 1998.
Match-Fixing in Italian Football:
Match-fixing is a hugely controversial issue in sport and was once prevalent in football. The most infamous case of this was in Italy during the 2005-2006 season. Italian football giants Juventus, Lazio, AC Milan, and Fiorentina were found guilty, via transcripts from calls, of pressuring referees into favouring their teams and giving them the majority of the decisions in the match –allowing them to gain a competitive advantage.▶
As a result of the Calciopoli scandal, Juventus were relegated to Series B and stripped of their two league titles in the previous years. Lazio was thrown out of the UEFA Cup and docked three points, AC Milan was deducted 30 points from the season, and Fiorentina were given a 15-point deduction and thrown out of the UEFA Champions League. It would go down as one of the darkest days in Italian football history.
Qatar: Qatar is well known as a country that represses the rights of both women and the LGBTQ+ communities as well as the exploitation and deaths of hundreds of thousands of migrant workers. A few examples of these rules are the fact Women need a man’s permission to marry, study abroad, and to access reproductive healthcare. Members of the LGBTQ+ community can be legally persecuted and same-sex marriage can lead to three years in Qatari prison. Finally, since
the awarding of the hosting of the World Cup, over 6500 migrant workers died buildings stadiums in harsh conditions. To many in the UK and the USA, the country seems a few decades behind Western Culture in its views and ideologies. However, the World Cup was hosted there in an attempt to portray the country positively.
Adverts featuring legendary footballers (David Beckham and Balon D’or winner Kaka) were plastered over television screens, encouraging members of the Western world to ‘Visit Qatar’ as well as the company sponsoring European football giants Barcelona, in an attempt to improve the country’s image.
Sports has been tarnished with controversy for years, and currently, it looks as though this is set to continue with modern-day match fixing, doping scandals, and sportwashing, still plaguing the sporting events we know and love.
By Alex Day
SPORTs FASHION
Why We Need To See More
Fashion and Sports isn’t a duo that you would expect to see hand-in-hand, but once you see it, it’ll have you craving more.
By Naomi Newman
standing-out on court, it gives athletes a way to express themselves and gives the fans a small glance into their personality. Without a doubt, it’s also a chance to break out of stereotypes showing that there is more to sports than just competing.
The Paddock Personality Lewis Hamilton:
Over the last few years, Sir Lewis Hamilton has brought colour to a paddock where you usually only see drivers wearing sponsored or team uniforms. However,
time World Champion arrived fast on the fashion scene and has attended the Met Gala since 2015 wearing a range of designers, from Dolce and Gabbana to Burberry, but 2021 was where we saw him stand out. In the middle of his historic Championship battle with Red Bull’s Max Verstappen, the Brit stopped by the New York cream carpet to make a difference. He arrived wearing a tailored black tuxedo with a calf-length white lace shirt by Kenneth
lot of young brands and designers don’t have the same opportunities, so that’s what really set me off.” In October, he was announced as a CoChair for the 2025 Met Gala, with the theme of ‘Superfine: Tailoring Black Style’ alongside Colman Domingo, A$AP Rocky, Pharrell Williams and, of course, Anna Wintour. He will be part of the launch for the exhibition highlighting Black style in menswear over the centuries. Posting on social media, he said: ”This theme speaks to me deeply.
When I started my career I never imagined what I might be capable of beyond my sport. The pressure to conform holds so many people back. Growing up as the only Black kid on the track, so often that pressure got to me. Expressing myself creatively was and still is my freedom from that conformity.”
Court Couture with Serena Williams:
taking inspiration from Andre Agassi, that’s exactly what Williams did in 2004. The US Open has been home to many of Serena’s unique apparel and her tied record as the woman who has won the most there.
In 2018, she arrived in a lavender, one-armed, tulle tutu dress, a nod to her long-time love of ballet and dance, produced by Nike x Off-White look designed by Virgil Abloh. Each year, she brings together a group
innovation’ from Nike, attempting to secure the future for designers of different ethnicities.
Talking on behalf of Nike, Williams said: “The world isn’t one colour. We come from different backgrounds and think differently. When you bring all that diversity together, can you begin to imagine the amazing things that you are able to make?”
Serena Williams is a player who set the standards, in more ways than one. She won 23 grand slams and was ranked World number one in singles by the Women’s Tennis Association for 319 weeks. Although the American has been present at many fashion events, she is most notable for her on court looks, with a long standing collaboration with Nike since 2003. Few people could show up to a match wearing a bedazzled black Nike vest, denim skort and a bellybutton piercing. Still,
of ten designers, consisting of apparel, footwear and graphics, from a diverse background of certain major US cities to produce a collection. The two words commonly used to describe the programme is ‘catalyst and
The Eco-Friendly Vision of
VUKO DESIGNS
Vuko Designs is a one-woman show. The Bristol-based designer, Lea Vukovic, 21, innovatively crochets all her bags from 100% upcycled t-shirt yarn – curating custom-made designs with your choice of colours and styles. What started as a way to de-stress from her intense university degree, has expanded into a thriving business. From Sunday markets to the highstreet, Vuko is making space for sustainable small businesses in the fashion industry.
To shop Vuko Designs, scan the QR code or visit @vuko.designs on Instagram to DM the maker herself.
handcrafted bags by lea vukovic
Scan to shop VUKO on Insta
Gigi Clutch, £35
Photography by Jessica Galgey
Image: A 2000’s
It’s 2024, and you’d think by now we’d be living in a world that’s inclusive, realistic, and totally over the “heroin-chic” trend that dominated the early 2000s. So, why is body image still such a mess in this day and age?
As I step into my twenties, having attempted to survive the unhealthy trends that dragged on from the noughties well into the mid-2010s, I’ve come to a harsh realisation: the toxic reality of body image may have been hushed in media conversations, but it hasn’t really been tackled where it matters—our real lives. Remember when shopping for the latest trends was an exciting adventure?
You’d save up your money, ready to splurge on everything at New Look or Zara. I still feel the thrill of stepping into
magical about scrolling through outfits while binge-watching your favourite series in bed. But can we talk about why we always end up ordering the same thing in two (or more) sizes?
For years, we’ve pointed fingers at models, magazines, and social media for perpetuating the lack of body inclusivity. But here’s the truth that hit me: clothes aren’t designed to fit us anymore. Instead, it feels like we’re the ones expected to fit into them.
During the early 2000s, the “heroin-chic” trend wasn’t just a passing fashion statement; it was a full-blown cultural obsession that glorified extreme thinness. Models like Kate Moss became the faces of this look, with their hollow cheeks and fragile frames setting a new, unattainable standard. This ideal wasn’t just kept to glossy magazine covers—it infiltrated mainstream fashion, shaping everything from runway collections to the clothes we shopped for on the high street. And even though there’s been a push for more body inclusivity since
When I turned twenty, the number on my jeans tag stopped scaring me like it used to. It’s no longer about the size of my clothes—I just want to feel comfortable and confident. What gets to me is the constant state of dysmorphia and confusion we live in. My wardrobe is a rollercoaster of sizes, ranging from a 4 to an 8, and that doesn’t bother me. What really bothers me is the anxiety that hits when I step into a dressing room or try to choose a size while online shopping- It’s honestly exhausting and
The way clothing sizes can vary so wildly from one store to another really shows just how out of touch the fashion industry can be with real life. Every brand seems to have its own take on what a “size 6” should actually be, which makes shopping a confusing and frustrating ordeal.
It’s like the fashion world is always shifting the goalposts, leaving us feeling like we can never quite measure up to their ever-changing standards. Instead of making things easier, this inconsistency just reinforces unrealistic beauty ideals and keeps us endlessly chasing after a moving target.
Though the fashion industry has a long way to go when it comes to adapting to our modern reality, there are a few brands which have become ‘high street heroes’ when it comes to empowerment.
Farid’s Fashion Finds:
1. Marks & Spencer
Why We Love It:
M&S is a staple of British high street fashion, offering a wide range
of sizes from 6 to 24, including petite and plus-size options. Their clothing is known for quality and comfort.
Empowerment Factor: M&S promotes body positivity through diverse representation in their campaigns and ensures that all women can find something stylish and comfortable.
2. Primark
Why We Love It:
Primark is the go-to for budget-friendly fashion, with an inclusive size range that typically goes up to size 22 (UK). They offer trendy, seasonal pieces at unbeatable prices.
Empowerment Factor: With their affordability and wide size range, Primark makes fashion accessible to everyone, encouraging selfexpression without breaking the bank.
3. New Look
Why We Love It:
New Look offers a wide variety of styles in sizes ranging from 6 to 32, with dedicated collections for plus-size,
trendy, affordable, and easily accessible.
Empowerment Factor: New Look champions inclusivity by offering diverse sizing and styles that cater to different body types, making everyone feel stylish and confident.
4. ASOS
Why We Love It:
ASOS is a leading online retailer with a wide range of sizes, including their “Curve” line (sizes 14 to 30), “Tall,” “Petite,” and “Maternity” ranges. They offer everything from basics to the latest trends.
Empowerment Factor:
ASOS is celebrated for its inclusive approach, featuring diverse models and offering fashion for all body types, ensuring everyone can find something that fits and flatters.
5.River Island
Why We Love It:
River Island is known for its stylish, affordable fashion with sizes ranging from 6 to 28 in their “Plus” collection. They also offer dedicated “Petite” and “Tall” ranges.
Empowerment Factor:
River Island’s inclusive size range and ontrend designs empower women to feel confident and fashionable, no matter their size.
Fashion is evolving rapidly, and while some brands are making well-intentioned strides towards inclusivity, there’s still a long way to go. The struggle against unrealistic beauty standards isn’t over—
it’s just taken a new direction. But with ‘high street heroes’ like M&S, Primark, and ASOS directing the change, there’s a glimmer of hope that one day fashion will empower rather than induce anxiety.
Until then, we need to push for a world where everybody is celebrated, not just those that fit a narrow definition of beauty. Because, at its core, true style is about feeling confident in your own skin—and no size tag should dictate that!
By Lily-May Broadhead
