As a victim of violence, I want the government to understand that tackling violence against women involves confronting the education of men and a “culture” that celebrates aggressiveness as a male trait and remorselessly pursues it. And alcohol fuels it by stripping away inhibitions (“The Observer view on violence against women after Bushey murders: rampant misogyny must be tackled”). No area of legislation has been overlooked or shelved more than this.
I am old now but I still don’t feel safe going out at night, on a crowded train coming back from London filled with drunken and over-exuberant football supporters.
It’s alcohol that’s the problem, and these laws need tightening more than all the others. I know domestic violence happens behind closed doors, but let’s try at least to get it off the streets first.
Why don’t we have a law about drunkenness on the streets as an outright offence? This era of allowing no control of ourselves must end. We would surely be happier, more secure, and women would be a darn sight safer if we had such a law. It’s gone far enough.
Jeanette Braithwaite
Bramley, Hampshire
I read the leader on misogyny and violence against women immediately after Catherine Bennett’s piece on the derogatory comments made about Labour female politicians’ outfits (“Reducing Labour women to the sum of their outfits is suddenly all the rage”). Is there not a link between the two?
If we really want to see women feeling safe and valued on our streets and in our homes, the press needs to support this on every page, not just in political reports. Snide comments about outfit choices and similar “banter” are unacceptable anywhere. Where they demean women, they are growing and promoting the violence we need to tackle so urgently.
Katie Croft
York
Harness roof power
I fully support a green energy strategy that includes wind-driven and solar/photovoltaic power stations (“Labour’s ‘rooftop revolution’ to deliver solar power to millions of UK homes”). I also believe it is insane to cover productive agricultural land with panels when national food security is a hot topic. Covering existing and new roofs with panels makes sense, but why just houses? Thousands of square metres of potential energy generation can be seen on the warehouses and factories that cover our landscape. Not one acre of valuable food-producing land need be sacrificed if all commercial and industrial roof owners were required by law to install panels, perhaps with some help from Great British Energy.
Please, Ed Miliband, let’s have some joined-up thinking that values our countryside as an asset for us all to enjoy in the hoped-for green future, while developing a sensible public policy targeting energy generation on industrial and commercial sites and structures.
Christopher Tanner
Llandovery, Carmarthenshire
Call time on MPs’ oaths
Rupa Huq says that she swore her oath of allegiance on the Qur’an, rather than using the “atheist affirmation” (“I’m a Muslim MP who rebelled on Gaza, but still I was barracked and intimidated”). Affirming (a right hard-won in the 19th century by Charles Bradlaugh, MP) allows the non-religious, those whose religion forbids the taking of oaths, and those who believe that religion should have nothing to do with the business of government, to become an MP. I look forward to the day when a religious oath is no longer part of the swearing-in process. MPs’ religion should be a purely personal matter.
Wyn Elizabeth Jeffery
Southampton
Free up our prisons
There is an immediate way to address prison overcrowding that does not necessitate the early release of potentially dangerous prisoners or the requirement to build new establishments (“Fears UK prisons face ‘collapse’ as they could be full before early release scheme begins”). A ban on custodial sentences of two years or less would mean that those who were convicted could serve an alternative method of punishment in the community. This would have the benefit of reducing numbers held on remand, as those who were likely to face a non-custodial sentence would be on bail. Administering a community-based restitution is a fraction of the cost of keeping a person in jail. As well as reducing pressure on prisons, this would help support an under-represented but particularly vulnerable group in our society – children of prisoners. It is well established that the outcomes for the families – particularly children – of prisoners are potentially very poor. This is especially true when multiple short sentences are involved that often result in a chaotic and unstable home life for those left behind. These children are more likely to suffer from a range of potentially debilitating outcomes, not least an increased risk of becoming offenders themselves.
Name and address supplied
Much obliged, I’m sure
More meaningful purpose at the heart of our businesses needs consumers, ie us, to support them, ie buy from them, instead of from cheaper or slightly more convenient options (“The rich were led to believe they were different. Those days are numbered”). Buying less is often better for the world at large, but show me a politician who would dare to promote that.
John F Kennedy’s quote, “Ask not what your country can do for you…”, is worth repeating by all politicians. So is Will Hutton’s closing line: “Labour needs to develop the language of fellowship, obligation and common good.” Obligation applies to poor and rich alike.
Sarah Redston
Oxford
Cancel culture and the arts
We agree with Nicholas Serota that “freedom of expression is at the heart of... every healthy society” (“Britain needs a cultural reboot. Here’s my five-point plan to fix the arts”). He is right to identify “the fear of vilification” as exercising a “chilling effect”, that must be “banish[ed]” from the “public square”.
But he is vague about who the chillers and the vilifiers might be. Our evidence at Freedom in the Arts is that it is often artists or staff at publicly funded arts organisations, including Serota’s own, that harass, or egg on others to cold shoulder those with whom they do not agree. Last week, I attended an online event by an organisation funded by Arts Council England in which the host stated that cancellation is a good thing in the arts. Some in the arts see cancellation, previously known as censorship, as a just form of community accountability. Freedom in the Arts has supported many artists who have been cancelled for their views, nearly always by other artists, arts organisations or students. Cancellation is a life-changing and devastating experience, restricting artistic freedom, undermining democracy and sometimes illegal.
We call on Serota and arts leaders in all four UK nations to acknowledge the arts has become mired in bullying. We need to act to restore tolerance and diversity of belief if we are to avoid the arts morphing into a censorious echo chamber.
Denise Fahmy and Rosie Kay
co-directors, Freedom in the Arts, Huddersfield
Goodbye and good riddance
Well done, Eva Wiseman, for calling out these bottom-feeding charlatans who prey on vulnerable people (“How much would you pay, honestly, to get back with your ex?”). She forgot to point out the obvious: an ex is an ex for a very good reason.
Judy Addison
Aberdeen
