logo
ALEXANDRA SHULMAN'S NOTEBOOK: It's a stitch up that men still decide what women wear

ALEXANDRA SHULMAN'S NOTEBOOK: It's a stitch up that men still decide what women wear

Daily Mail​2 days ago

The fashion crew descended on Rome last week for Dior's annual cruise show, for a display of exceptional evening gowns. It was the final collection by creative director Maria Grazia Chiuri – the next day the fashion house announced she was leaving.
She's done a fabulous job for the past nine years. Remarkably, one of her strengths has been creating clothes that women actually want to wear. You might think that's a given, but it's not. So much of fashion designs are about attracting noise and heat around the brand – which then makes its real money from perfume and handbag sales.
Word has it that the Irishman Jonathan Anderson, who has joined Dior as head of menswear, will take Chiuri's place. If that is indeed the case it will mean the only couture house in the world with a female designer is Givenchy, where Sarah Burton is creative director.
It's extraordinary that the luxury fashion industry – which in huge part is driven by female customers – is still largely run by men.
Clothes are the most intimate of possessions, covering our body and affecting the way we move and feel. It should follow that women might understand better than a man what women want to wear. And yet, time after time, men are given the big-money jobs.
The whole creative director pool becomes a closed circle of musical chairs, as the majority of designers with experience in top roles are men. Even Chanel, where founder Coco remains one of the most famous names in fashion, has hired Matthieu Blazy from Bottega Veneta to take the helm.
Fortunately, the Italian leather house that Blazy left behind is one the few places with the guts to hire a woman. His replacement is the British designer Louise Trotter.
Mozzie bites again – now it's personal
We put men on the moon and cracked the secrets of DNA, but why has nobody found a way to end the misery of mosquito bites?
I write from a beautiful house in Majorca, gazing over a majestic valley scented by terraces of jasmine and orange groves and serenaded by the early morning sound of tinkling goat bells.
It should be paradise – and it is, apart from the fact that every day I am covered in new red welts that appear almost as soon as I arrive in any hot climate.
Despite cramming an arsenal of mozzie-busters into my suitcase – including a chargeable hot pen I have bought that's meant to instantly combat the itching, but is actually just painful – nothing works. I remain lethally attractive to these demons.
Other guests are totally bite-free, and a discussion of my woes threw up the suggestion that certain blood types may be irresistible to mosquitoes.
If that's the case, mine must be like Chateau Petrus to the blighters. Sadly, a complete blood transfusion isn't a practical option. Any solutions greatly welcomed, as it's only May and I'm already a patchwork of bumps. But please don't bother suggesting citronella, Vitamin B, or deet. Been there, done that, and they don't make any difference.
Ball games allowed, but all the time…
What is it with boys and balls? Watching two men compete at ping pong the other day before they headed off to do combat on the local tennis court, I wondered why the male of the species is so attracted to ball games.
It doesn't matter their age. If they can move, they will be up for football, cricket, tennis, padel – anything that involves a sphere they can bash around.
Some might say it's the British public school system that ingrains a culture of ball games into our men. A good chap is good at sports. But the reality is that almost all small boys head for the nearest ball as soon as they can walk, and remain inseparable from them for the rest of their lives.
It's one thing we can't blame on the British class system.
Show it off – that's why you bought it!
We went shopping to buy more holiday clothes that we will be able to wear only a few weeks a year.
Back at the house, I immediately put on my new shirt. But my host was having none of that – he was saving his for some occasion that merited breaking it out.
And so I discovered a great hidden divide among shoppers.
One group of people promptly wear new clothes. The other squirrels theirs away, waiting for heaven knows what. Baffling.
Trump has brought Canada into the light
Canada owes a debt of thanks to President Trump for his mission to turn the nation into the 51st American state. His ludicrous scheme has thrust into the limelight a country that's often regarded as a rather dull place that interesting people leave as soon as they can. As the daughter of a Canadian father, I feel entitled to make such an insulting observation of a place that I have never visited – because I was brainwashed from childhood into that opinion.
My dad was proud of the fact that he left Toronto with the Canadian Military during the war, fell in love with London and never returned. But now it's all change.
Canada is in the news along with a bevy of Canadians such as Ryan Reynolds, Pamela Anderson, Graydon Carter and Neil Young.
Even King Charles and Queen Camilla dashed over there last week for a state visit to show their support for this huge – and under-rated – country with Trump's crazy ambitions looming over it.
And just like that, another book's done
Pity the poor Booker Prize entrants. This year's celebrity judge Sarah Jessica Parker announced recently that to get through the workload she's reading two books a day.
If you've sweated over your oeuvre, polishing every adjective and stressing over a semicolon, the idea of a judge racing through your precious sentences at breakneck speed will come as a blow. Perhaps SJP thinks you can binge-read Booker novels the same way you binge-watch her Sex And The City follow-up series And Just Like That in one night on Netflix.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Reeves faces fresh pressure to spend billions more on affordable housing
Reeves faces fresh pressure to spend billions more on affordable housing

The Guardian

time13 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Reeves faces fresh pressure to spend billions more on affordable housing

Rachel Reeves is under renewed pressure to spend billions more on affordable housing, after an industry report suggested the government had significantly overestimated how many new homes would be built over the next few years. The chancellor is being urged by figures inside and outside government to spend heavily on affordable housing at this month's spending review, as a report by one of the country's biggest housing companies cast doubt on official forecasts. The findings from Savills suggest the government is further away from hitting its target of building 1.5m new homes than previously admitted. Its findings are likely to boost the arguments of Angela Rayner, the housing secretary, who is at loggerheads with Reeves over how much her department should be given to build new affordable homes. Kate Henderson, the chief executive of the National Housing Federation (NHF), which commissioned the report, said: 'This analysis shows that reaching the OBR's [Office for Budget Responsibility] forecasts, let alone the government's targets, will require a generational boost to investment in social and affordable housing.' Chris Buckle, the residential research director at Savills, added: 'The heroic rates of growth forecast by the OBR will not be achieved without further action from the government to support demand – particularly support for housing associations and an ambitious new grant funding programme.' One government source said funding for affordable homes was proving a sticking point in negotiations over June's spending review, with Rayner pushing for Reeves to spend much more heavily on it than the previous government did. Labour's vow to build 1.5m houses over the course of the parliament has been central to its promises on economic growth and tackling the cost of living. Hitting the target would require 300,000 net new additions to housing supply every year of the parliament – a level that has never been hit before. Ministers argue that they will be able to stimulate a housing boom by making changes to the planning system that make it far easier for private developers to invest in new schemes. Their claims have been bolstered by official forecasts from the OBR, which say there are likely to be 1.3m net new homes built over the five years to March 2030. Reeves welcomed that forecast in March, saying it showed the government was within 'touching distance' of hitting its target. However, the findings from Savills suggest ministers are much further from that target than Reeves's words suggest. First, the report says the 1.3m forecast applies to the whole of the UK, while the government's target applies only to England. It also highlights the fact that the OBR's forecast is for a period until March 2030, nearly a year after the latest possible date for the next election. Taken together, the report estimates the government is actually on track to oversee the building of 1m new homes by the end of the parliament – only two-thirds of the way to its target. In addition, Savills found the OBR had relied on historically high estimates of private housebuilding to create its forecast. In 2030, for example, the forecast says there are likely to be just over 1.2m private house sales, of which 160,000 will be newly built properties. This would be far in excess of historical trends, given that transaction volumes throughout the 2010s were closer to 1m, and that sales of newbuild properties rarely exceed 10% of the total number of transactions. If overall sales and sales of new properties remain closer to recent trends, it would mean only 100,000 new houses going on sale every year – less than two-thirds of the OBR's forecast. The OBR's forecasts also rely on affordable housebuilding rising in line with the private market, despite the fact that the number of new affordable homes being started has collapsed recently – down 35% in England in 2024 and 90% in London. The report comes amid a standoff between Reeves and Rayner over how much to spend on affordable housing until the end of the parliament. With less than two weeks to go until the chancellor announces departmental spending limits for the next three years, officials say the two cabinet ministers are yet to reach an agreement on the housing budget. At the March budget, Reeves announced an extra £2bn for the government's affordable homes programme in 2026-27. But Rayner is understood to be arguing for more, saying the extra money was billed at the time as a 'downpayment' on the government's housing commitments. She argues that the 1.5m target will be missed without much higher levels of support. The NHF has calculated that to meet housing need the government must build 90,000 new socially rented homes a year, which if entirely publicly funded would cost the government £11.5bn a year. The federation is also urging Reeves to guarantee that social rents should go up by 1 percentage point above inflation for the next 10 years – double the length of time the government has proposed. This would help buttress the finances of the country's housing associations, 11 of which recently wrote to the housing minister Matthew Pennycook warning of 'the worst housing situation in living memory'. Henderson said: 'This certainty of income is vital for housing associations to unlock the private investment needed to build new affordable homes and deliver growth, jobs and improved living standards.' Part of the government strategy for hitting its building targets is to reduce environmental protections, saying: 'We can't have a situation where a newt is more protected than people who desperately need housing.' But this is causing grave concern among environment groups who say that nature in England and the UK is already in crisis, that builders are already not fulfilling the promises they have made on nature, and that the delays in housebuilding are very unlikely to be entirely down to bats or newts. The OBR declined to comment.

Man convicted after burning Koran in public
Man convicted after burning Koran in public

Telegraph

time14 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Man convicted after burning Koran in public

A man who set fire to a copy of the Koran outside the Turkish Consulate has been convicted of a racially aggravated public order offence. Hamit Coskun shouted 'f--- Islam' and 'Islam is religion of terrorism' while holding the religious text above his head during a protest on Feb 13. The 50-year-old, who was violently attacked by a passerby during the demonstration in London, went on trial last week, accused of an offence under the Public Order Act. At Westminster magistrates' court on Monday, he was found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly conduct, which was motivated 'in part by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'. Coskun's lawyers argued that his prosecution was an attempt by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to reintroduce and expand blasphemy laws in the UK, 17 years after they were abolished. The CPS said that Coskun was not being prosecuted for burning the book. They argued it was the combination of his derogatory remarks about Islam and the fact that it was done in public that made it an offence. The CPS originally charged Coskun, who is an atheist, with harassing the 'religious institution of Islam'. However, the charge was later amended after free speech campaigners took up his cause and argued he was essentially being accused of blasphemy. District Judge John McGarva said, 'there was a real problem with the original charge, which referred to Islam as if it was a person, when it is not'. He said, however, that the current prosecution was not 'an attempt to bring back and expand blasphemy law.' He said: 'A decision needs to be made as to whether your conduct was simply you exercising your right to protest and freedom of speech or whether your behaviour crossed a line into criminal conduct.' Katy Thorne KC, Coskun's barrister, had argued that even the amended charges against him effectively criminalised any public burning of a religious book and were tantamount to blasphemy laws. 'It is effectively chilling the right of citizens to criticise religion,' she said. She said Coskun's actions were not motivated by hostility towards the followers of Islam but to the religion itself. Judge McGarva, however, said he did not accept that argument. Addressing Coskun, he said: 'You believe Islam is an ideology which encourages its followers to violent paedophilia and a disregard for the rights of non-believers. 'You don't distinguish between the two. I find you have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers. That is based on your experiences in Turkey and the experiences of your family.' 'Highly provocative actions' Giving his verdict, Judge McGarva said: 'Your actions in burning the Koran where you did were highly provocative, and your actions were accompanied by bad language in some cases directed toward the religion and were motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.' The judge ordered Coskun, who is currently claiming asylum, to pay a fine of £240. The court heard Coskun, who is now in hiding, had to flee his home country of Turkey two and a half years ago to escape persecution. He argued he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Giving evidence, Coskun made a number of comments about Islam, including claiming the majority of paedophiles are Muslim. Lawyers for the CPS insisted that Coskun was not being prosecuted for setting fire to the Koran. Philip McGhee, for the CPS, said: 'He is being prosecuted for his disorderly behaviour in public.' He added: 'Nothing about the prosecution of this defendant for his words and actions has any impact on the ability of anyone to make any trenchant criticism of a religion. On Feb 13, Coskun, who is of Armenian-Kurdish descent, travelled from his home in the Midlands to the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge. He then set fire to the holy book and held it above his head, shouting, 'Islam is religion of terrorism'and 'f--- Islam'. As he did so, a passerby attacked him and appeared to slash at Coskun with a blade and then began kicking him when he fell to the ground. Although the man has admitted assaulting Coskun, he has denied using a knife in the attack. The man, whose identity is subject to reporting restrictions, will go on trial in 2027. 'We intend to appeal this verdict' The National Secular Society (NSS), which, alongside the Free Speech Union, paid for Coskun's legal fees, said the verdict 'jeopardises' free expression. A spokesperson for the FSU said: 'This is deeply disappointing. Everyone should be able to exercise their rights to protest peacefully and to freedom of expression, regardless of how offensive or upsetting it may be to some people. 'The Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society intend to appeal this verdict and keep on appealing it until it's overturned. If that means taking it all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, we will do so.' 'Religious tolerance is an important British value, but it doesn't require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers. On the contrary, it requires people of faith to tolerate those who criticise and protest against their religion, just as their values and beliefs are tolerated.'

Verstappen: Russell collision 'not right and shouldn't have happened'
Verstappen: Russell collision 'not right and shouldn't have happened'

Top Gear

time20 minutes ago

  • Top Gear

Verstappen: Russell collision 'not right and shouldn't have happened'

Formula One The reigning champ seemed to hit George Russell on purpose at the Spanish Grand Prix… Skip 1 photos in the image carousel and continue reading Max Verstappen has admitted that his collision with George Russell in the final few laps of the Spanish Grand Prix was, er, not the wisest thing he's ever done. The four-time champ appeared to deliberately crash into ( The lawyers won't like this - Ed ) the Mercedes driver – with whom he has no shortage of beef – after they'd already hit each other a few corners earlier. Advertisement - Page continues below Seconds after the safety car restart Russell had dived down the inside of Turn 1, but contact between them forced Verstappen to take the escape road, allowing him to keep P4. His team advised him to give up the position, but he replied: 'What? I was ahead mate. What the ****?!' ( Can we mention the stewards actually sided with Max here? ) You might like So when he lifted into Turn 5 it looked like he was letting Russell through, but he accelerated again and barged straight into his rival. Later when Lando Norris saw a replay of the incident, he said: 'I've done that before… in Mario Kart.' Awks. Verstappen was quickly slapped with a 10-second penalty which dropped him from P4 on the road to P10 in the final classification, and he's now 49 points behind championship leader Oscar Piastri, who took the chequered flag in Spain. Advertisement - Page continues below What caused Verstappen to see red? His race fell apart when the late safety car forced him onto a sub-optimal set of hard tyres, and that immediately cost him a podium place when a massive snap of oversteer allowed Charles Leclerc to glide past at the restart. ( Let's make clear just how impressive that incredible save was, or the comments section will have a field day! ). To make matters worse, the Ferrari and Red Bull then touched as they converged on the same line, although the stewards let that one slide as neither driver was deemed mostly to blame. After the race Russell said Verstappen's actions '[let] him down', to which Verstappen said he would 'bring some tissues next time.' However, it sounds like he's had time to reflect overnight. 'We had an exciting strategy and good race in Barcelona, till the safety car came out,' wrote Max on Instagram. 'Our tyre choice to the end and some moves after the safety car restart fuelled my frustration, leading to a move that was not right and shouldn't have happened. Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter. Look out for your regular round-up of news, reviews and offers in your inbox. Get all the latest news, reviews and exclusives, direct to your inbox. 'I always give everything out there for the team and emotions can run high. You win some together, you lose some together. See you in Montreal.' Verstappen needs to be careful now: he's up to 11 penalty points on his racing licence and one more earns him a race ban. Although some have argued that causing a crash on purpose should earn that automatically. ( Groan, I can hear the cries of 'Bias!' already. ) Thoughts, folks?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store