Breadwinning

Jenny and I have never believed in the idea of the male breadwinner, or all the ideas that go with it, like a man being ashamed of not earning enough, or not earning at all. Or the man not doing some glamorous, enviable job but some unglamorous job like a barista.

Jenny and I have never been bothered by which one of us is working or which one of us is supporting the other.

I supported her when she was studying for degrees and she supported me when I was unemployed. By the time she retired she was earning much more than me but neither of us saw that as a problem. Certainly I was never ashamed of failing some masculine expectation about working or not working.

Nor did it matter that I spend many years working in humble bookshop or admin jobs for a very modest wage (and thoroughly enjoying them).

But I gather a lot of men are still hung up on the old male breadwinner formula and get quite eaten up if they're not fulfilling their required gender role. And it seems a lot of women are still under pressure not to overshadow their men workwise.

The statistics: in 29 per cent of marriages both spouses earn about the same amount of money. Some 55 per cent of marriages have a husband who is the prime or sole breadwinner and 16 per cent have a breadwinner wife.

So the male breadwinner pattern is a long time dying.

PS: I missed a few comments on previous posts because I no longer get comments by email. My apologies if someone has been overlooked.

No stopping

Over-tourism again. A woman is complaining that while she was hiking in the Peak District in Derbyshire her parked car was damaged and she got a parking fine. She wanted to witness the sunrise, after seeing videos of the Mam Tor beauty spot on social media.

She was parked near a clearway sign that means no stopping. She assumed that because lots of cars were parked on the road she could do the same.

She admits parking near the clearway sign, but blames the road authorities for not building more car parks or adding extra road signs.

There are several responses to that. Firstly, she should have obeyed the road sign and not copied the other motorists. Secondly she should have realised that all the parked cars were narrowing the road and it was highly likely that her car could be damaged by a large vehicle. And thirdly, there are plenty of places to view a sunrise and she didn't need to drive to Derbyshire from her home town of Milton Keynes, a 250 mile round trip.

No wonder so many places are blighted by over-tourism if people don't have the common sense to go somewhere that's not already far too popular and plagued by thoughtless visitors.

There's no need for more car parks or extra road signs. What's needed is a bit more savvy about where you're planning to go and the havoc caused by hundreds of day trippers like you descending on the latest trendy beauty spot.

Jenny and I are fond of Castlerock, a seaside village on the north coast with a population of around 1160. Usually there's hardly anyone about and it's wonderfully quiet and peaceful. But everyone flocks to nearby Portrush, which in the summer is overflowing with visitors.

Nowt so queer as folk.

Pic: the summit of Mam Tor

Frail and doddery

There's a plethora of stereotypes about older people, most of which are nonsense - or at least they apply to some oldies but not to others. For example:

• We're dripping with wealth
• We're frail and doddery
• We're overwhelming the NHS
• We don't like young people
• We're living in the past
• We're intolerant right-wingers
• We're terrified we'll be mugged - or burgled
• We drone on about our medical problems

Well, let me see now. How many of these stereotypes apply to myself?

• Dripping with wealth? I'm well-off but not wealthy
• Frail and doddery? Not yet. Still pretty healthy
• Overwhelming the NHS? I hardly ever need a doctor
• Don't like young people? Only if they're stupid or nasty
• Living in the past? I've been on the internet for decades
• Intolerant right-winger? I'm a dyed-in-the-wool leftie
• Terrified I'll be mugged? Not in this low-crime neighbourhood
• Medical droning? I never mention my health issues to others

Stereotypes are just that, aren't they? One-sided clichés that never give you the full picture of anything. Stereotypes of young people are just as one-sided and incomplete as the stereotypes of oldies.

The stereotype that really annoys me is the idea that we oldies are overwhelming the NHS. If the NHS was properly funded, properly staffed, and properly equipped with up-to-date machines and technology, then it would cope very well, oldies and all.

Well, we can dream....

Cushy or what?

I've never been in prison, or even visited prison. I don't know anyone else who's been in prison (unless they're hiding it of course). So my knowledge of what it's like to be in jail is nebulous to say the least. It comes entirely from second-hand sources like books and the media.

And naturally there's a wide spectrum of impressions and it's up to me to decide which impressions seem more credible than the others.

Some say prisoners are pampered. They have all mod cons like TVs, computers and mobile phones. They have free board and lodging and no bills to pay. Being in jail isn't a punishment but a cushy number. After all, some ex-prisoners deliberately commit new crimes so they can return to prison!

Others say prisons are horrific places and not in any way cushy. Prisoners have to piss and shit in their cells, they're stuck in their cells for 23 hours a day, they get raped by other prisoners, they hardly ever see their loved ones. Not to mention their deteriorating mental health.

I guess the reality is that prisons vary immensely, and while some may be fairly bearable others are hellholes of cruelty and violence.

It's noticeable that prominent public figures tend to be spared the worst jails and get placed in the more hospitable ones, like the so-called open prisons that have the least restrictions on movements and activities.

If I ever ended up in jail, there's no way I could survive such a brutish existence. I would go completely mad in a matter of weeks. How other people endure jail for decades on end I can't imagine. Their resilience is extraordinary.

Standing firm

My mother (Audrey) would never have called herself a feminist ("they're so strident and aggressive and obsessed"), but she nevertheless believed in women being strong and not being pushed around by men.

She stood up to my father when he opposed her wish to train as a teacher (or a schoolmarm as he put it). He wanted her to stay at home and be the diligent housewife she had always been. He didn't want anything to interfere with his cosy domestic routine.

But my mother resisted him and went ahead with learning to drive and then training as a primary school teacher. She knew that if she didn't follow her long-standing urge to try her hand at teaching she'd always regret it.

She taught for something like ten years and adored every minute of it. She loved helping her pupils to improve their reading and writing and maths and simply encouraging them to enjoy learning.

As it happened, my father died just a few years after she retired and his intransigent stance died with him. I don't think he ever came to terms with my mother's steadfast resolve to follow her own path.

I thought her attitude was wonderful and I supported her every inch of the way. It would have been a terrible shame if on her death bed she had voiced her regret at not having done something she dearly wanted to do.

I never asked her, but I imagine she was very pleased that women today are encouraged to be whatever they want to be and make the most of their abilities.

To be or not to be

Much controversy over the proposed demolition of Grenfell Tower, the 24-floor London tower block that was consumed by fire on 14 June 2017, killing 72 people and injuring many more.

Some people say it should stay there to recall the tragedy and all the careless mistakes that led to the inferno. Others say it should be demolished as it's an unwanted reminder of a dreadful disaster, forever traumatising those who want to put it behind them and have some kind of closure.

My opinion is neither here nor there as the tragedy never affected me personally, but for what it's worth I'm in favour of demolition.

Surely keeping the tower there acts as a disturbing trigger for any sensitive person who walks past it or sees it from their window, and would rather not have the awful reality of that day constantly thrust at them.

Those who want to preserve the tower say its presence stops people from forgetting the disaster, but did New Yorkers forget about 9/11 after the remains of the twin towers were destroyed? Of course not.

Apart from anything else, the tower requires regular maintenance to ensure its structural safety. Can it withstand really strong winds like those of Storm Eowyn a couple of weeks back?

Those who favour demolition are planning a remembrance garden or a memorial to mark the tragedy. That seems more sensible than maintaining a burnt-out and rotting shell for years on end.

PS: The Ministry of Housing says engineering advice is that the tower is significantly damaged and will get worse with time.

Pic: Grenfell Tower

Those were the days

I've always said I'm not a nostalgic person. Meaning I don't look back longingly at some earlier time as some sort of golden age and wish I was there and not here.

Except that actually I'm doing something remarkably like that. I look back at the Britain of 50 or so years ago and I do think life then was a lot better than it is now. There seem to be more and more things today that look like a step backwards and not a step forwards. Things that were better than now:

• Houses were much cheaper
• Rental fees were much lower
• Less cumbersome technology. Fewer passwords, pin numbers, memorable words etc.
• Less misogynistic abuse and hatred
• No social media
• People were more polite and more considerate
• Less traffic on the roads
• Tourism hadn't got out of control
• No Airbnb
• Flying was more comfortable
• University education was free
• No smartphones and no need for them
• Villages weren't full of vacant second homes
• We weren't besieged by news
• Politicians were more serious and more competent
• Transsexuality hadn't been taken over by fanatics
• Much more council housing (public housing)
• More public toilets
• Fewer dangerous leisure drugs
• Less anti-social behaviour
• No food banks

That's a pretty impressive list of "how things were better". I'll have to stop denying I'm nostalgic and start furtively harping on about the good old days. Then I really will be an antiquated old codger.

PS: Jenny has corrected me about misogyny. She says it was much worse - and much more blatant - when we were young.

The neighbour from hell

I'm always fascinated by those acrimonious neighbour disputes that just go on and on for years, disputes that surely could have been easily resolved a long time ago with a bit of common sense and compromise.

This one is a splendid example. Yoga teacher Kristyna Robinson endured seven years of misery from her upstairs neighbour Sandra Eveno, until the landlord, the local council, obtained a repossession order on Ms Eveno's flat and she was forced to leave.

Ms Eveno had shouted and screamed unremittingly, had tried to take over their shared garden, had accused Ms Robinson of drug dealing and gang violence, and had made false allegations to her other neighbours and her employer.

Ms Eveno was ordered to pay £15,000 towards the council's legal bills.

Hopefully this will end Ms Robinson's seven-year ordeal - unless Ms Eveno continues to pester her former neighbour despite having moved out.

Clearly Ms Eveno's irrational behaviour suggests serious mental health issues, but I can't see her seeking therapy. More likely she'll persecute her new neighbours just as badly and get evicted again.

We had a similar neighbour dispute when we moved into a London flat in 1993. The young lads downstairs held late-night parties every few days. We asked them to have fewer parties but they took no notice and in the end the local council imposed a huge fine for noise nuisance and they moved out.

We had another neighbour dispute in a previous flat. One of the downstairs occupants had a persistent hacking cough, and when we tentatively told him it was disturbing us, his response was to let our car tyres down.

Which is why we're now glad we live in a detached house with no neighbour nuisance whatever.

Fragile trees

At about 5 am on Friday morning Jenny and I were woken by a very loud thud from outside the house. We discovered that our magnificent eucalyptus tree in the back garden had been blown down by the ferocious gusts of Storm Eowyn and was completely blocking the road.

At about 5.30 am we saw that our huge pittosporum tree behind the kitchen had also been brought down by the storm. Luckily it didn't damage the heating oil supply pipe close by or we would have had a further problem - oil leaking everywhere.

Fortunately a tree surgeon came past later on a visit to a neighbour's house where two more trees had collapsed, and we arranged to have the eucalyptus tree cut up and removed yesterday morning.

Now of course Jenny and I have to decide whether to replace the eucalyptus or not to bother. We're inclined not to get another as it has shallow roots and is more vulnerable to strong winds. I'm told they're also more liable to fall if they're in moist soil, which weakens the roots. And guess what Northern Ireland is known for? Quite a lot of rain....

We probably won't replace the pittosporum either, as it was too close to the house and also has shallow roots.

Trees are very beautiful, they provide shade in the summer, they provide places for birds to nest, and they're good for the environment. But they're not so appealing if the little blighters decide to fall down and it costs us an arm and a leg to have them removed.

But I guess the two trees had a good run for their money. They were at least 20 years old and were lovely to look at.

Pics: Pittosporum tree (top); eucalyptus tree (below)

Self medication

Of course we all self medicate to some extent. We attempt to avoid all the palaver of seeing doctors or going to hospital by trying some recom-mended medicine or diet or exercise routine.

Except that some people think they actually know better than doctors, take things to an extreme and cause themselves and others serious harm.

It's horribly sad when people are convinced they can cure their cancer with some sort of natural remedy or unusual health regime, and end up not only not being cured but maybe dying much sooner than they would have done.

It's even sadder when parents harm their own children by subjecting them to an extreme diet - vegan or macrobiotic or whatever - which children can't digest properly and which lacks vital nutrients. Even when the child is visibly sick and in need of emergency medical treatment, they still insist the diet is health-promoting and refuse to give it up.

I just wonder how anyone can be so stubborn and so irrational as to pursue a self-chosen "treatment" based on nothing but subjective belief.

A Florida mother who fed her three children on a strict vegan diet of raw fruit and vegetables was jailed for life for killing her 18 month old son. He was severely malnourished and weighed only 17 pounds (8 kilos) when he died.

If I had some severe illness, I would never presume to know more than the doctors and pursue some eccentric regime I'd seen on social media or heard someone gossiping about. I'd assume the doctors knew better than me, even if they might sometimes get things wrong.

Self medication has its limits.

Shunning the jab

There's concern among health professionals at the declining take-up of vaccines, especially among young people. They're worried about the misinformation spread online exaggerating the risks of vaccines.

Some four per cent of the population resist vaccinations, either for themselves or for their kids. They're concerned about the safety or side effects of vaccinations, they think their child doesn't need protecting, or they believe vaccines are not very effective.

But many more people were kept alive by the covid vaccine than died, despite anti-vaxxers claiming that many people have suffered harmful after-effects.

Personally I've never suffered any serious after-effects from vaccines, and I've had loads of vaccinations in my 77 years on the planet - flu, shingles, tetanus, covid, and all the childhood vaccinations for things like measles, mumps and rubella.

But I know of people who've developed long covid, which is about two million people in the UK. Fit and healthy people have suddenly become bed-ridden and their lives have been drastically curtailed.

Long covid doesn't follow vaccination though, it only follows an acute covid infection. In fact a covid vaccination tends to limit a covid illness and prevent long covid. So refusing to have a vaccination is irrational.

Of course you can say that if I myself had developed long covid I wouldn't be so enthusiastic about vaccinations. Maybe so, but all I can say is that I was vaccinated and luckily I had only very minor after-effects.

Objecting to vaccinations seems like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

Desperate measures

Thousands more young adults are living with their parents because they can't afford to live indepen-dently. Property prices and rental fees have rocketed while salaries have barely risen, and if they're living on their own they just can't make ends meet.

I'm glad I never had to consider living with my parents. When I was a young adult there were still plenty of affordable rentals and I could live on my own quite easily. I did so for 6½ years, and most of the people I knew were equally self-reliant.

I couldn't possibly have moved in with my parents, they had very different personalities and opinions, and we'd have fallen out rapidly. As it was, I was estranged from my father for many years so living with him was never a realistic option anyway.

Apart from anything else, if  I'd been under my parents' roof, I'd have had a very restrained existence. I couldn't stay out late and get back in the small hours as it would have woken them up. I couldn't get drunk as they didn't approve of alcoholic excess. I couldn't have had friends round as they were somewhat anti-social. It would never have worked.

Some parents are happy to have their children living with them again. They don't like being "empty-nesters" and can't adjust to a half-empty house. Other parents are glad to have the house to themselves and only reluctantly allow their children to return. My parents would definitely have been the latter.

Hotel Mum and Dad has never been more popular.

What I dread

I really dread getting seriously ill these days, given the huge crisis in the NHS. People are waiting hours for an ambulance, then maybe more hours outside a hospital waiting to be admitted, and maybe more hours still before getting any effective medical treatment.

If I have a heart attack or a stroke, I'm highly unlikely to get prompt medical attention, because of long waits for medical treatment. By the time an ambulance arrives I could either be dead or much more seriously ill.

Significant numbers of people are dying unnecessarily because of long waits for medical treatment. It's estimated that there were almost 300 deaths a week associated with long accident and emergency waits in 2023.

Neither the British government or the Northern Irish government show any sense of urgency in getting the NHS back to its former high standards, the standards that were once seen as the envy of the world. Now the healthcare systems of many other countries are seen as better than the NHS.

We oldies and our multiple medical issues are often blamed for the parlous state of the NHS, but of course that's nonsense. The problem is a much more general one - lack of staff, lack of money, lack of up-to-date equipment, lack of efficient organisation.

More and more people are resorting to private healthcare as the NHS fails them. People who've been waiting absurd lengths of time for surgery, scans, physiotherapy or other procedures, people who've been in agonising pain for months or even years, are having to fall back on private provision to get the immediate attention they need. But of course many people simply can't afford to go private, they just don't have the spare cash.

And the situation isn't going to improve any time soon.

Hidden away

Liam brought up an interesting question about art. Should private individuals be allowed to buy up as many famous paintings as they like and keep them hidden away, or should those iconic artworks be on permanent public display in museums and galleries?

A tricky question. There are strong arguments on both sides.

• Don't individuals have the right to buy whatever they choose, even if it's something other people would love to look at but can't? After all, there are thousands more remarkable paintings for people to look at, so what does it matter if a small fraction of them are stashed away somewhere inaccessible?
• On the other hand, shouldn't the public have the right to view famous masterpieces whenever they like without their being squirreled away for the benefit of half a dozen lucky people? Why should we be deprived of a celebrated painting people want to study more closely and marvel at?

Well, we have several original paintings hanging on our walls, and intend to hang on to them, which is easy enough as none of the artists are well-known and nobody is clamouring to see them any time soon.

A bit of a shame as we can't make shedloads of money out of selling them to the highest bidder. The Van Gogh in the article mentioned was last sold to a Japanese paper tycoon for $62.5 million and today would probably fetch about $300 million.

I think a compromise solution would be for private collectors to be obliged to exhibit their art works publicly for at least a few months every year, to give people a chance to see them. Anything else is just selfish hoarding.

Pic: Portrait of Dr Gachet by Van Gogh. Thought to be owned by an Italian family.

Not needed

Multivitamins are generally regarded as good for your health, ensuring you're not missing out on anything and getting all the vitamins you need.

But now I read they're a waste of money because they don't actually boost your health. A study of over 20,000 adults published in the British Medical Journal found no difference in disease or health conditions between those who took multivitamins and those who didn't. And a recent review of over 80 studies on vitamin and mineral supplements concluded they had little or no benefit in preventing cancer, cardiovascular disease or death.

Personally I've only taken multivitamins a couple of times, for a very short period, when I thought I might need them. They certainly had no visible effect on my health or well-being.

Nowadays I only take two tablets regularly - one to keep my blood pressure down plus vitamin D because most of us lack it in sun-deprived Britain. I avoid taking tablets unless I really have to. The odd aspirin or indigestion tablet is about it. Oh, and vitamin C if I have a heavy cold.

Jenny and I do our best to follow a nutritious diet that ought to give us all the vitamins we need. We eat lots of raw food like fruit and nuts and try to avoid anything ultra-processed (chocolate somehow slips through the net).

Jenny has been taking flaxseed oil tablets for a long while as she says they improve her health. Well, if that's what she says....

Sailing along

As we get older we're supposed to get more and more indifferent to what others think of us and just go sailing happily along in our own little self-centred bubble.

I don't find that at all. If anything I'm more aware of what others think of me and more concerned that someone might have a negative opinion of me.

I think I was probably more indifferent to other people's view of me when I was a child. Children are notoriously oblivious to how people see them and casually blurt out anything that comes to mind. I'm sure I was just like that, causing offence and shock and disbelief everywhere I went.

Of course that's partly because children don't have much of a stake in their surroundings. They're not home owners worrying how the neighbours see them, or employees worrying how the boss sees them. They just do their thing in a state of blissful self-indulgence.

No, as I grow older I consider other people's reactions to what I say or do all the time. I certainly don't go blundering along upsetting everybody. Children may have the excuse of a tender age but an adult of 77 has no excuse whatever.

I watch all the politicians saying anything that occurs to them, however offensive or contemptuous or untrue and I wonder how they can bring themselves to be so recklessly outspoken. If only they could think before they speak, people might have a bit more respect for them.

News avoiders

More and more people are deliberately avoiding news reports as they find them too depressing and alarming. They're actively looking for alternative media content that's more cheerful and optimistic.

At the start of this year, 39 per cent of people questioned said they sometimes or often avoid the news, up from 29 per cent in 2018. They're overwhelmed by rolling news alerts and commentary, much of it horrific or worrying.

I must say my own attitude to the news is somewhat ambivalent. I want to know what's going on in the outside world, but I also recoil from so much outright brutality and misery - which I can do nothing about.

Of course journalists will argue that they have to give us the full horror of events like wars or mass rapes or barbaric regimes, so we realise just how dreadful they are. To skirt over sickening details or play them down in order to "spare people's feelings" is simply irresponsible.

But at the same time as we're made aware of all these appalling events, we're usually unable to do anything about them, which leaves us feeling not only depressed but frustrated and helpless. I have no influence over any of the public figures who could give us a better world. I can only watch as horror after horror unfolds.

In the end the only thing I can do is turn off the news and retreat into my comfortable domestic bubble, watching episodes of Simon's Cat, listening to Bonnie Raitt, and re-reading my favourite authors. Thank heaven for culture, which is always a reliable antidote to the savagery of the outside world.

Never hooked

I've never been hooked on alcohol. It has a pleasant taste and it relaxes me a bit but I can take it or leave it. In fact I've now given up alcohol entirely and I haven't missed it for a second (Jenny has more or less given up as well).

I didn't have any alcohol until I was 23, when I was an evening student at a London college and a group of us would go round to the pub after the lesson.

Like the others, I tipped the alcohol down with gay abandon, and put up with the inevitable hangover the next morning. It was only after a hangover so appalling I was barely able to function that I decided to severely cut down my drinking.

After I left college I stopped drinking altogether and I drank no alcohol for a good decade until I met Jenny and we started socialising a lot, which led me back to alcohol.

We never drank that much, but there were evenings when we would consume a whole bottle of wine. We've been drinking less and less and a couple of months ago decided to quit alcohol altogether.

For me alcohol has never had the supposed benefits people mention. It doesn't make me more confident, or more talkative, or more vivacious, or help me to cope with a big shock. Usually it just makes me sleepy and vague and not very good company.

We're also saving a pile of money of course, especially at restaurants where a single glass of wine can set you back seven quid. Is it worth it?

Incidentally why is copious alcohol the routine way to celebrate? Couldn't we celebrate some other way?

Festive fork-out

Is it outrageous to charge your family members for their Christmas meal? Or is it fair that you shouldn't have to bear the full cost yourself and the other diners should pay for their share?

Last year Carla Bellucci charged her guests £150 each for their Christmas meal. This year she's charging £200 ($252). She justifies the £50 increase as covering the rising cost of food and utilities. She says "Paying up is the least they can do for all the time and effort I'm putting in." *

Only adults and teenagers over 16 are required to pay, while younger children dine for free. She says anyone unwilling to pay is welcome to decline the invitation.

Not surprisingly she has received a torrent of online abuse, including death and rape threats. But a lot of people agree with her that the cost should be shared.

It's a valid point that expecting one person to foot the whole cost of the Christmas meal is rather unfair, on top of all the other Christmas expenses. But I suspect that many of the guests quietly slip the host a tenner or two towards the cost.

But £200 a head is a pretty hefty charge, especially since she expects the guests to bring their own alcohol and drinks. Are they being served caviar and oysters? Are the choicest ingredients being flown in from across the world?

Jenny and I are dodging the whole controversy. It'll be just the two of us for our Christmas meal. And it certainly won't cost us £400.

* Maybe she's also charging for the time and effort?

A love of tea

We Brits have always been known for our love of tea. Tea umpteen times a day and if anyone drops in unexpectedly the first thing you offer them is a cup of tea.

Except that our love of traditional tea is now declining and people are opting for other drinks instead. Like herbal tea, fruit tea and green tea. Or of course coffee. Youngsters in particular are shunning traditional tea, which some see as an old person's drink.

Well, tea consumption isn't slowing down in our household. We drink five or six cups of tea a day and only one or two cups of coffee. I used to have the occasional herbal tea though I still preferred the real thing, as it were.

When we're staying in hotels there's never enough tea in our room and invariably we nip out to get extra tea bags (except at Premier Inn where you can help yourself to as many tea bags as you want).

Luckily we don't live in the 17th century, when tea was still very expensive and only the wealthy could afford it. Also the first tea cups didn't have handles, which only became the norm in the 18th century.

Iced tea may seem new, but it's anything but. It was praised by the Irish novelist Marguerite Countess of Blessington in the 1820s and rapidly became popular. But iced tea is not for me, I like my tea hot.

If I have to go too long without tea, I feel seriously deprived. I just love the taste.