There are times when the internet, quite simply, makes me feel exhausted. Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you’re undoubtedly aware of a number of tragedies that are taking place right now.

It’s times like these, when a number of catastrophes and scandals are going on, that I really start to notice the difference between Facebook and Twitter. Specifically, the people on said social media websites.

When news broke of the tragic events in Norway I can genuinely say there was not a single word about it from anyone on my Facebook. This didn’t really surprise me, because when there are photos of babies with chocolate around their mouths, who really needs to say anything about terrorism. Of course, the news of Amy Winehouse was everywhere.

I’m not judging anyone, there have been plenty of times when I’ve picked up a newspaper and skim read about a terrible tragedy, thought to myself how sad it is and then turned the page over. Rushing over to Facebook to voice my sadness was not a priority and that’s fine.

Twitter on the other hand is very different. I heard the tragic news about Amy Winehouse about half an hour before Sky News had confirmed it. That’s the power of Twitter, I’m far more likely to log on than to check BBC news if I want to know what’s going on in the world. And that’s what I love about it, because people express opinions significantly more on Twitter.

Although, with this power I sometimes find comes an element of superiority. Suddenly I’m being told by complete strangers what I should feel sad about and what a terrible human being I am for feeling sad about something else. Endless re-tweets pointing all the other tragedies happening right now like one is more deserving of our sympathy over the other.

The bombing in Norway was shocking and the images and footage on the news last night were harrowing. The death of Amy Winehouse was not a surprise and, to me, that makes it all the more tragic. These are the news stories making the headlines so this is what people are reading about, as such this is what people are going to comment on. Am I expected to apologise because I’m not regularly Googling all the other atrocities going on in the world so I can feel equally, if not more, sad about them too?

People that decided to throw random ones out there, such as “16,000 children died from starvation today, just make sure you know that”, are absolutely no better than anyone else. If that is the case (I think that statistics are largely bollocks and rarely trust them) why do they think tweeting about it gives them some moral high ground? Are they doing anything directly about it, is that why they’re throwing it in to the sea of terrorism tweets? Are people expected to think ‘it doesn’t matter that one musician died because thousands of others have today, I must feel sad about that?’

I’m loosing track slightly because I’m still quite infuriated but hopefully I have made my point that feeling sad and commenting online about famine instead of a celebrity death, or vice versa, doesn’t make you a bad person.

Lazy ‘should’ve gone to rehab haha funny she didn’t and now she’s dead’ jokes, however, DO.

There’s a lot about fashion that I love; it’s fun, experimental and such a large part of every day life it’s impossible to escape it. There is also a great deal of aspects I really don’t love. And typically these aspects involve everyday people.

Enter the ‘pioneering new series that celebrates the style and creativity of everyday girls and guys up and down the country - with one lucky stylista (not a real word) bagging a dream job as a New Look stylist’. Style The Nation. On T4. I hate it already.

Presented by Nick Grimshaw (strike three) and on the surface it appears to be a show celebrating, not so much style and creativity, but typical looking East London wankers with a-symmetric haircuts. I thought it best to watch it before I judged. I needn’t have bothered.

I almost can’t handle how much idiocy is in this photo.

It’s amazing how wanky you have to be to make it clear to people that you love fashion. Watching a run down of the semi finalists in the first few minutes was like being smacked across the head with a box of pure stupidity. There was one girl wearing a maxi dress upside down. UPSIDE DOWN. Even the mentors, who looked like a Culture Club tribute act on heroin, were baffled by this unspeakably stupid notion. One girl said “yeah, that’s beaut.” I’ll leave that there.

The wanky winner goes on to become a stylist for New Look, which is a very good prize for dressing like a tit. The main issue for me is that very the concept of the show completely negates itself. They have taken on people whom they consider to be stylish and unique to cater for a mass market. The various styling challenges they had to do were with vintage clothing not a high street store, such as New Look. In fact, considering it was for New Look I saw very little influence from them throughout the show.

They also seem to be under the impression that stylists make the trends. Maybe I’m wrong but I was always under the impression that trends were down to the trend consultancy agencies that then release them, in books that can cost up to thousands of pounds, to the fashion houses. Once the catwalk shows are out, the trends are watered down several times over to suit the high street demographic. But what do I know? I don’t wear upside down clothing.

Final outfits did not represent the typical demographic that shops in New Look, the participants look like they wouldn’t be caught dead shopping in New Look and even the creative director of New Look couldn’t recognise that this element was completely absent during the process.

This very creative director who said: “the best thing about fashion is taking a trend and making it your own and someone is going to be doing that for a living”. From an individual’s point of view, yes that’s wonderful. However, from a mass-market point of view that’s a terrible business strategy. New Look is a high street retailer catering to mass appeal and not really pioneers in unique style. You will find copies of what they are selling at varying prices and fabrics in majority of other high street stores.

An example of this contradiction was during a ‘boho-chic’ shoots self task where they were to create a ‘boho’ look for various occasions. Heading off to Brick Lane, naturally, to rummage through vintage shops, it was pointed out that they were to keep in mind a mantra of ‘would a celebrity wear it?’ A celebrity such as Sienna Miller, who reportedly hates being labelled ‘boho’, wouldn’t wear the outfit the girl had pulled. It was too out there for a high street market and once again negating the premise of the show.

My eyes were not prepared for what came next; boho for the red carpet. Queue a union jack chiffon dress. And, of course, everyone lapped up this ridiculous outfit like it was an innovation. It’s always these moments where I wonder if I’m seeing the same thing everybody else.

Ultimately, of the six finalists’ outfits that went down the runway, only two of them looked anywhere near the ideology of New Look. And neither of them won. The two that did win have probably not shopped at New Look since they were sixteen.

Proof once again, that there is a fine line between being fashionable and looking like a dick and an even finer line between being stylish.

Maybe I’m a little bit late catching on to this but this whole Imogen Thomas/Ryan Giggs debacle still seems to be sparking debate.

I’m reading more and more pieces from people (sadly, mostly women) blaming Thomas for the affair and calling her, among other things, a tart, cheap slag, slut, gold digger, bitch. You know, the usual lot that women get when they’ve slept with someone. It serves as a valuable reminder of the sheer beauty that the English language is capable of.

I’ve not read a great deal about the whole situation and let’s face it, the only two people who will ever know the whole truth is the two involved. I’m not on anybody’s side in this case, because I don’t know either of these people and I don’t care enough. What I do care about is how quick people can be to put the blame solely on the woman.

It’s a terrible shame when footballers, or indeed any person, decides to cheat on their partner. And that’s something we need to remember that cheating is a choice, you can say no and walk away or you make the decision to stay.

It must’ve been awful for Giggs’ wife to find out in the manner that she did, but surely it was even worse to know that your husband attempted to pay top dollar to cover it up. Still, people were quick to blame Thomas for selfishly telling the story despite the fact that’s not how it came to light. When the injuction was broken it was the press that named her and she is still bound by said injuction and so can’t talk about it, anyway.

And while Thomas shouldn’t have had an affair with a married man, I don’t think I’m completely out of line for pointing out that it was up to Giggs to not cheat on his wife. Rather than wondering why Thomas wasn’t considering the feelings of Giggs’ wife, can it be questioned why Giggs’ himself didn’t bother to consider her feelings?

Giggs has been strangely quiet on the whole matter and seemed quite content to let Thomas take all of the shit that came with this situation. He decided to think with his head and shut up rather than with his penis. Well done to him. He piped up with some lame defence that he didn’t want to shame his wife, conveniently forgetting that it’s easier to not shame your wife by not fucking around behind her back.

People are quick to forget that it takes two people to cheat and I do feel that Giggs has been let off completely out of cowardice. They both did wrong but, when all is said and done, they are not the first and unfortunately will not be the last to succumb to temptation.

Giggs, rather than standing up and admitting he did wrong, chose to throw his toys out the pram and threaten to sue Twitter. If he had done this in the first place it would have been completely old news by now.

Thomas has done right by wanting to defend herself, maybe she does want sympathy and if you don’t want to give it to her, then don’t. But don’t be so quick to act like she murdered someone, she’s human and made a mistake. And people need to stop reacting as though she has hurt them personally and further remember that more of the blame lies with the person who had the most to lose. And in this case it was definitely the man.

Earlier in this post I said I wasn’t on anyone’s side but, fuck it, Ryan Giggs was the one who royally fucked up here and while Imogen Thomas is not without blame, she certainly doesn’t deserve a public lynching.

And I really hope someday we come up for the male equivalents of such terms as slag and slut, or abandon them completely, because this case has highlighted that disgusting double standard of men having promiscuous sex being heroes and women being slags as an ever-prevailing attitude.

It’s outdated, completely wrong and I can only hope that I’ve managed to at least highlight the complete ignorance surrounding such terms.

Thankfully, the royal wedding has been and gone. I got incredibly bored of the very words and their faces long before the day itself. I was invited to a celebration which I thoroughly enjoyed and those around me were enthusiastic enough to make up for my lack of joy. I got to drink all day whilst wearing a pretty dress. Any excuse.

So here is the last article I wrote for The Demon with regards to the only opinion I had on the royal wedding and that is I simply don’t get all the fuss about that bloody blue dress Catherine Middleton wore and a few other points. Enjoy.

Bangin’ dress. Crap wave.

The hills were most certainly alive with the sound of Royal Wedding buzz, not for me, but seemingly for the rest of the country. However, I saw this wedding from a completely different angle to most of those around me. I was completely indifferent to the festivities because it was a union of two people who I don’t know and will never know. I was grateful for the extra day off, don’t get me wrong, but generally I think the whole concept of the Royal Family is incredibly outdated and they sound mental so they don’t particularly hold my interest.

However, Catherine Middleton has caught my eye in the sense that she is now being pegged as a ‘boost for British fashion’. I was aware of how seemingly popular her £400 Issa engagement dress was, the blue wrap around number, and high street stores were very quick to rip that one off. Why though? Just to clarify it was a COBALT BLUE WRAP AROUND DRESS. This is nothing new; in fact they’ve been gracing catwalks for years. It is a stylish garment that rarely goes out of fashion, particularly in Autumn/Winter season. Since I didn’t really understand what all the fuss was about I looked in to it a little further. And I didn’t like what I found.

Middleton, I am sure, is a lovely girl and I do feel for her in the sense that she under immense pressure to appear a certain way and to perform her princess duties. Not to the extent that her ‘journey’ needs to be compared to a girl who died performing bomb disposal in the army, like one vile national newspaper did. (Hint: it rhymes with Haley Fail) But, she is under intense public scrutiny, everything form her weight to her hair will be dissected and I certainly don’t find it a desirable way to live.

Niceties out of the way, I was horrified to discover that Middleton has had three wedding dresses done just in case the design got leaked to the press before the big day. Yeah, god forbid, what a travesty to justice that would be. Further to this I found a quote from Harold Tillman, chairman of the British Fashion Council, which I thought was rather interesting. He said “She [Middleton] will have a huge impact on the British fashion industry. I’m confident she will support it - not deliberately - but purely through her own taste.”

I gather from this that she will have an impact by wearing clothes? Simple as that? Aren’t we all doing that? I found it particularly intriguing because this was not long after I had read an article blasting PM David Cameron’s wife, Samantha Cameron, for having the so called audacity to wear a £750 designer dress to a conference. It was said that her choice of dress in a time when families are struggling through a recession was ‘insensitive’. I would almost understand this point but let’s be honest, she is the Prime Minister’s wife and she’s hardly about to stand behind her husband wearing Primark’s finest is she? And the funnier thing is that the very same papers slating her for being insensitive would most likely be the first to criticise her for wearing cheap clothing given her position.

Further to this, Samantha Cameron is an unpaid ambassador for the British Fashion Council. I consider that quite a massive direct contribution to British fashion and I don’t understand why she got a hard time for daring to wear a designer dress but Kate Middleton is praised to high heaven for wearing a £200 blouse from Whistles. It’s a plain and simple bitchy double standard as I don’t believe either of these women are representing our current society and that is simply because they are privileged. In fact, you would have to be pretty naïve to think they wouldn’t be spending more on their clothes than those who cannot afford. Can you honestly say that if you came in to their kinds of money you’d favour New Look over Reiss? I highly doubt it. If you think your spending habits wouldn’t change than, frankly, you’re a liar.

Now, let me just be clear that I am not a Conservative and I think her husband is a deplorable human being and he has the kind of face that makes me want to take up boxing, but I do have a certain amount of respect for Samantha Cameron for her various charity work and, of course, her impressive fashion and style sense. She may not represent my political beliefs but I feel she is a much more encouraging and stronger role model than Middleton.

If I had a little girl I would much rather she aspire to be a powerful, hard working, self proficient and confident woman much like Samantha Cameron. I would be more likely to encourage her to vote Labour (and not waste your vote on Liberal Democrats) but it’s certainly a better aspiration than to be a princess. I’m sure Kate will start her charity endeavours soon enough but I can’t help but think it’s more of a status obligation rather than a genuine yearning to help save the world. I’m not saying she’s a terrible person or anything like that, I’m just not too quick to false for this false idealisation of Kate Middleton being a saint for marrying a prince. I wish her the best of luck, and again, thanks for that day off.

You can also find my article in all its printed glory at The Demon website.

Disgrace. Extremely delayed blog post as per bloody usual.

In my defence, I have been INCREDIBLY busy finishing up three very long years at university. My complete lack of organisation finally did not get the better of me this year. I was completely prepared, happy with my standard of work and didn’t end up having a hysterical break down in my pyjamas, clutching a glass of wine outside the library. I’m definitely calling this a victory.

My final presentation was absolutely horrendous. It was only worth 5% so I wasn’t fussed about that, I just really hate giving presentations where you have no idea what you’re going to be asked about. I was horribly nervous that I was going to get grilled and resort to running out of the room screaming. My fears were confirmed when a fellow buyer, whose presentation was before mine, came out of the room looking like a rabbit caught in headlights. They asked a million questions, apparently, and it was indeed awful. Brilliant.

I, however, was greeted with complete silence and was asked approximately four questions. One of which was a repeated question (“So, in hindsight, what would you have done differently?” – one minute passes – “if you could go back and do it again would you do anything differently?” Good work, tutors.)

Of course, I was very relieved and eventually my voice and hands stopped shaking. And then it was over. ALL OVER.

Upon leaving the room I threw my stuff on the chairs in the hall and just collapsed. I hugged my good friend/model Alexia, still shaking, and we went for a celebratory coffee. Below is my first sip of freedom.

I am currently recovering back home in North Wales for a week before I go back to sort out my degree show, go on holiday (to Cornwall – MEGA excited!) graduate, do work experience, move to Nottingham and start a Masters. FUCK YEAH.

Anyways, I thought I would share the end product with you all. Here are a few photos of my final collection, Impressionable, designed for Vero Moda as modelled by the lovely Jess.

DISCLAIMER: I didn’t make the vest top or cardigan. The looks were achieved with a little help from Vero Moda and Topshop! I did, however, make the flowery dress, yellow bow top, silver dress and purple skirt. And I’m quite proud of them, unlike some sneaky arseholes on my course, I received no outside help. They may be simple garments but I worked very hard on them. Go me!

Now for some down time so that I may write, read, blog and bake.

One day…

I’m surprised Tumblr even still let me log in it’s been that bloody long since I wrote anything on here. Apologies to the four people that read this I can’t imagine how you’ve been coping without me ranting at you from your computer screen. Well, I’m back now.

The lack of blog posts, despite having mountains of content, has purely been down to total lack of time. Every time I think I’ll do one I suddenly remember that I have something else to do which is relevant to my degree. I do occasionally forget that I’m trying to pass my degree…

In local news, my time at The Demon is sadly coming to an end. One more issue to do after the Easter holidays and that’s it. It will most likely be a John Galliano piece. I’m quite sad to be saying goodbye, it’s the only bit of university I’m going to truly miss. Since I’ll be going in to education/continuing to be horrifically poor for another year I won’t really miss anything else just yet. I might just carry on sending them anonymous content every two weeks anyway. Everyone NEEDS to know how my opinion of Lady Gaga/Cheryl Cole is developing after all.

Speaking of The Demon I am nominating myself (I’m not going to wait for someone else to do it for me!) for Best Female, Best Article and Best Section at the upcoming Demon Media Awards. With any luck I can rectify some of those lies I’ve put on my writing CV by actually winning something. Keep your fingers crossed for me. Random nominations are welcome from anyone of course; just bombard The Demon with post it notes saying something to the extent of SOFIA FARELLI IS FUCKING GREAT or THE PAPER IS NOTHING WITHOUT HER. Do what feels right.

As some of you may have seen I’ve started a new collaboration with Superfly. Hoping to develop into more of a lifestyle brand they are seeking more people to contribute to their fashion section and one of those people is I! And it’s working, we actually have a little team building up! I have only done two so far but my little mind is brimming with content and it’s significantly less angry than most stuff I write. I knew I wasn’t completely hateful.

I promise more relevant stuff will be up here eventually. I’ll leave you with this final thought: SAY NO TO CHARITY AND YES TO COMEDY.

N.B. Apologies I have no idea how to put videos on here and have no time to find out how so just click the links you lazy bastards.

This is the pitch video for TP4 Film’s indiegogo crowdfunding campaign . Email if you like tp4films@gmail.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgI5So-y96c

I find the term ‘cutting edge’ is thrown around a great deal inside the fashion industry. I often think it’s a kinder, but lazy, substitute for ‘absolutely ridiculous.’ There are times when the catwalk shows feel like a performance of The Emperor’s New Clothes; where everyone is too scared to admit they don’t quite understand what they’re seeing, through fear of being branded “just hopelessly stupid”. Everyone is in on it, the models, the fashion journalists, buyers, and even the designers themselves. They must be.

I have to believe that this is one elaborate inside joke because otherwise I think we’re in trouble. In an age where original ideas are starting to become quite scarce, people are favouring the shock factor instead. There are certainly times when it works, but all too often it really doesn’t. Originality is a tough one because whatever idea you’ve had it’s highly likely it was already done thirty years ago. Probably by Madonna. So, when originality isn’t on your side why not just throw some latex and rubber armbands in to the mix.

My case study, and personal hate figure, is Gareth Pugh. An English designer, who hit the cover of Dazed and Confused with his use of balloons to accentuate model’s joints in his degree show, who consistently hits distasteful and ugly notes with his exclusively, and highly un-wearable, catwalk collections.

The t-shirt should really read ‘I am a cock.’

Pugh has used everything from synthetic hair to electrically charged plastic in his collections. He boasts that he makes ‘wearable sculptures to distort the human body almost beyond recognition.’ Believe it or not, I have no issue with experimentation and fashion is about pushing boundaries and I further think that there is often a fine line between art and fashion. It’s when these lines become blurred to the point where it’s plain stupid that I just don’t see what point they’re making.

Pugh regularly receives comparisons to the likes of Alexander McQueen and Vivienne Westwood for his use of form and volume. Where these designers differ greatly is the latter understand the female figure and create luxurious garments that challenge traditional fitting and create fantasy, but in a way that doesn’t exclude women. This is the area I feel Pugh is lacking especially that his work often seems self-indulgent. It seems that he will do it just because he can. Admittedly, his most recent ready to wear collections has been toned down a great deal but, to me, it’s still not a favourable area of fashion.

The Spring 2011 collection looks like he drew inspiration from The Fifth Element and broken dishes. Ultimately, I would argue, it doesn’t create a flattering look on anyone. I know models are supposed to be straight faced on the catwalk but I doubt they were overly happy about wearing clothes that resembled sheets of metal anyway. In an interview with Style.com, Pugh said he was “keen to avoid the sci-fi tag.” Well, sir you failed miserably on that front.

His Spring 2010 collection also puts me in mind of the clothes people thought we’d be wearing by the new millennium, when we were all supposed to be getting around on spaceships and have our thoughts and feelings processed by computer. That kind of stereotypical ‘futuristic’ and ‘innovative’ clothing that nobody outside Lady Gaga land would ever be seen wearing. And I consider the term ‘futuristic’ to be one of the most vague adjectives known to man. Don’t even get me started on ‘edgy’, I will argue until I’m blue in the face that’s not even a valid term. Innovative can mean ahead of the times, and I just can’t picture a time when this breed of clothing will be the norm. At least I hope and prey it never will be socially acceptable to put a circle of spikes around your ears or to walk around in an S&M latex mask.

Maybe I’m being cynical but I just don’t see any redeeming factors in so-called designers like Pugh. He receives critical acclaim, he has a boutique on Hong Kong and even celebrities like Beyoncé and Kylie Minogue have been known to wear his creations. Henry Holland even made one of those eighties throwback slogan tees for him emblazoned with UHU GARETH PUGH. While I don’t agree with those tees unless it’s George Michael circa Wham era, I love Henry Holland and hate to disagree with him.

So, I certainly can’t argue that Pugh isn’t doing anything right, he’s clearly got basis for appeal to the fashion masses. Maybe it’s me missing the point? Perhaps I am ‘just hopelessly stupid.’ I read all of his positive reviews and I just wonder if we’re actually seeing the same thing going down that catwalk. Or maybe my mind is too closed for the fashion industry now. It’s so difficult to make it as a designer now; of course you need something to make you stand out. Although it does feel like it’s no longer really about talent or the ability to design garments. So often garments get dismissed with ‘we’ve seen it all before’ but just because we’ve not seen it before doesn’t make it good. For example, Pugh’s polo neck top with sheer mesh from the shoulders down, it’s a basic garment given a new edge. And it is absolutely hideous. Personally, I’m going to stick with my whole items of clothing, thank you Gareth.

What scares me even more is that should Pugh really hit the big time, we’re going to start seeing his work gradually creeping up in high street stores. Primark will be ripping off his work and how well do you think a latex suit with wrap around spikes will translate on to the high street? Can you imagine the fabrics? The cuts? We were all there when neon came back, weren’t we? Oh, the humanity.

I really do not feel well. I’d say it’s a combination of a cold and stress. Thanks, uni. Does that degree guarantee me good health? No you say? Fine, I’ll attempt to pass with a 2.2 BUT I will NOT enjoy it.

If you can forgive the opening inner monologue and are willing to carry on reading then, thanks. You’re very kind. First up is my mild rant about how I hate internet shopping. I see a lot of perks but I’m not completely convinced, especially when it comes to clothes.

Internet shopping and me…

I’m just going to come right out and say it. I hate buying clothes online. I actually really dislike Internet shopping. I do, however, love shopping when funds will permit me to. I know many people that swear by ASOS and the Topshop website but I am simply not convinced. Hovering the mouse over the ‘buy’ button just doesn’t give me the same satisfaction as finding something in store and falling in love instantly.

I, for one, love the whole shopping experience. You weren’t going to catch me at the opening of Primark on Oxford Street (or an opening of any store, they’d have to give me on outstanding goodie bag if I was to be trampled by deranged women who seem to think the store won’t be there the next day) but I get a lot of joy from going in to shops. I love to rifle through racks trying to find a bargain. Even when a sale looks like it’s full of rubbish you can usually find a hidden gem it’s just a matter of perseverance. I just don’t find the same thrill with shopping online, it’s all just…there. Where’s the fun in that? Admittedly, the novelty of sales wears thin around Boxing Day when people leave their dignity at the door and debase themselves for a 40% discount on items they didn’t want all year but suddenly just have to have that day.

In the same manner I love wondering through Zara (who have far more dignified sales than, say, H&M) and admiring their wonderful layouts. I love to wonder around and get a feel for fabrics, styles and, most importantly, I love trying clothes on. The ideal fit should never be underestimated and that’s one of the main issues I have with buying online. It’s risky in the sense that what you see on screen might not be what arrives at your doorstep in three to five working days. Lighting can be a tricky one where details can be missed and I can never truly trust the image no matter how many zoom options the website offers me.

You can’t trust photos of the models purely because they’re models. They will look good in anything. So you have to wait for it to arrive and what if it’s wrong? Not as simple as going in store for a refund as every company has their separate returns policy for goods bought online. More often than not it’s a pain and will ultimately cost you, whether it be time or money.

And of course let us not forget our faithful high street friend, the charity shop. The bargains, rare find and down right offensive garments you can find in charity shops are an absolute thrill. And, best thing is, it’s always cheap as chips. In our current economic climate can we really afford to leave the high street behind? What’s going to occupy the spaces instead? Ebay stores? I shudder at the thought.

I just read this article about young girls and the princess obsession and it got me a little riled.

The article is an extract from author Peggy Orenstein’s book ‘Cinderella Ate My Daughter’ and is basically highlighting the princess culture in which girls are submerged in from a very young age. I am not here to slag off Orenstein, far from it, as I think she made one or two valid points, however, I think there is a massive generalization here that does no more good for girls than the culture she’s arguing against.

We’ll start with the Disney princesses; many females reading this can probably relate to the idea that as we grew older we came to the realization that the Disney princesses are pretty terrible role models (yes, Ariel gave up her VOICE to get a man) but we had no idea when we first watched those movies as children. Primarily, because we were not focused on ‘getting men’ since children don’t think like that. We saw a pretty mermaid with beautiful, long red hair who lived under the sea with a singing crab and fish as loyal companions. That’s amazing. Prince Eric was mere after thought.

This article further opened my eyes to this whole sub-culture, I didn’t even know existed, of people actively fighting against what is known as ‘the pink culture’. Children’s marketing is very split down the middle in the sense that there are toys for boys and there are toys for girls. Boys like blue and girls like pink. Everybody is aware of this but we don’t all have to fall victim to marketing.

“Orenstein says very young children don’t yet understand that your sex is fixed — that you can’t go to sleep a girl and wake up a boy. So little girls may be drawn to pink, sparkly princess gowns as a way of asserting that they’re definitely girls.” And here is my main issue; little girls do not even know what the notion of gender is.

The children I have known, through family and friends, don’t seem bound by gender limitations at all. I’ve known little girls who love football and Ben 10 AND I’ve known girls who love shopping and Miley Cyrus. Neither culture is doing them any harm provided they have parents who allow them the option to choose when they get that little bit older.

I will say for the record that I love pink. I love floral prints, shoes, polka dots and I basically wish my life was like the Cath Kidston section at Selfridges. I was raised on Disney movies, pretty little dresses and all things girlie. I also greatly admire the works of Sylvia Plath and Charlotte Bronte. I also enjoy watching rugby and will often choose to drink beer when I go out, not because I’m making a stand against social conventions but because I enjoy it. I’m currently writing a dissertation on the gendering of Impressionism in the late 1800s. I highlight my notes with a pink highlighter and I drink my tea from my pink and or dotty mugs because I think they are pretty.

“According to the American Psychological Association, the girlie-girl culture’s emphasis on beauty and play-sexiness can increase girls’ vulnerability to the pitfalls that most concern parents: depression, eating disorders, distorted body image, risky sexual behavior.” I don’t deny that of course girls (and boys) are subject to these problems, but this is a self esteem issue as opposed to the moral dilemma of allowing them a pink fairy costume. It starts with the parents to teach their kids about healthy body image and to have self respect.

We can’t blame the media for EVERYTHING. Eventually, we have to start thinking for ourselves.

Before this week I had no idea who Andy Gray was. It was a happier time. I will never feign interest in football as I think it’s one of the most tedious sports out there. However, Gray being at the center of a sexism row has certainly attracted my attention. Not in the game but in the politics of it all. One look at the mugshot on The Guardian website and I immediately picture him to be that bloke in a pub, preying on girls young enough to be his daughter because he thinks he’s still got it. I could be wrong.

Gray and Richard Keys (again, no clue who he was) were speaking thinking their microphones were switched off and mused that female officials “don’t know the offside rule”. Disagreeing with a decision is fair enough but I still fail to see where gender came into it. Their reaction is typically archaic from men of a different generation that still deep down think women belong elsewhere, not necessarily in the kitchen, but certainly not on the field.

Through various articles, comments and Tweets it’s obviously provoked a mixed reaction although it remains clear football is still considered, very much, a man’s game. One bright spark commented on Facebook “this whole fucking island needs to get a sense of humour and grow a pair of testicles”. I love logic.

There was talk of Sian Massey needing to be ‘thicker skinned’, however, it’s not a case of simply not being able to take criticism. Being told you made a wrong decision is entirely different to being told you aren’t capable of making the decision in the first place because of your gender. It’s pretty worrying that women have had to fight to get to this level of equality.

Sky probably did the right thing by sacking him as this attitude of NO GIRLS ALLOWED in football is pretty outdated and such attitudes belong in the playground.

Having said that, if Gray is to be made an example of when is someone going to call for those absolutely horrific Boots adverts to be taken from our screens?

You see what they’ve done, playing on the stereotype of men being nothing without their women who are out having it all. They can conquer the world even when they have a cold, in part because of cold and flu medicine starting at just 99p at Boots… they absolutely ADORE giving gifts of toiletries and hair products to their friends, because of Boot’s excellent 3 for 2 deal… and we all know how hopeless men are at taking hints about what women want for Christmas. Say CK1 by Calvin Klein as many times as you like but they still won’t get it. Say it whilst brandishing a meat cleaver in one hand and their testicles in the other and they will STILL suggest buying you a hairdryer. Silly men.

That is some of the most sexist advertising I can ever remember seeing. It makes me resent being a woman. I refuse to believe there is a woman out there who is ever that bloody happy to be buying toiletries.

Unfortunately, we’ve still got a way to go on equality on both gender’s parts but sadly I don’t think we’re ever going to get it quite right.