Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

Bridgerton Season 4: 13 Biggest Differences Between The TV Show And Books

Published

on

Golda Rosheuvel has played Queen Charlotte in all four seasons of Bridgerton

All on-screen adaptations of books make changes and take creative license with the original source material, and Bridgerton is no exception.

Over the last four seasons, the Netflix period drama has made a number of significant changes to Julia Quinn’s series of romance books when bringing them to life for the small screen.

When original showrunner Chris Van Dusen first took on the task of bringing Julia’s world to Netflix in 2020, he knew he’d have to make some changes and modernise the stories of regency romance.

“Even though the show is set in the 19th century, I still wanted modern audiences to be able to relate to it,” he told Oprah Mag in 2020.

Advertisement

As a result, the book makes numerous tweaks to the source material, switching key romances, making major changes to some characters and cutting others completely, helping to create the show the whole world has become obsessed with.

Here are 13 of the biggest differences between Julia Quinn’s books and the Netflix show…

Queen Charlotte, a real historical figure who was married to King George III, is not featured in the Bridgerton books

Golda Rosheuvel has played Queen Charlotte in all four seasons of Bridgerton
Golda Rosheuvel has played Queen Charlotte in all four seasons of Bridgerton

It’s hard to imagine Bridgerton without Golda Rosheuvel as Queen Charlotte, gossiping in court while sporting her fabulous headwear.

However, the real-life royal never actually appeared as a character in Julia Quinn’s book series. In fact, Queen Charlotte is only mentioned once in the novels, when she’s briefly spoken about in passing during the sixth book.

Advertisement

Original showrunner Chris admitted that he wanted to expand the world of Bridgerton through the monarch who was on the throne in 1813, when the first series takes place.

“What really struck me with the books from the beginning is that this was an opportunity to marry history and fantasy in a really exciting, interesting way,” he explained to Oprah magazine.

Julia Quinn loved this addition, even admitting she wished she had thought of it herself.

“I go back and forth between wishing I had actually written her in the books and then being glad I didn’t, because I don’t know if I could have done as good a job,” Julia added.

Advertisement

Julia would later write a prequel book about Queen Charlotte – which was itself adapted for Netflix in the show’s first spin-off – inspired by her addition to the Bridgerton universe.

“I had never done any type of writing where I had source material before and especially to have source material that’s in a very specific structure,” Julia told The Hollywood Reporter in 2023. “So what you really have to do is break down the architecture of a television script and then figure out how to put the pieces back together as a novel. To somebody like me who loves puzzles, it is really fun.”

The Bridgerton TV show puts a much greater emphasis on Lady Whistledown than the books

Nicola Coughlan's Penelope Featherington was hiding a secret in the early episodes of Bridgerton
Nicola Coughlan’s Penelope Featherington was hiding a secret in the early episodes of Bridgerton

Much of season one revolved around the mystery surrounding gossip columnist Lady Whistledown, later revealed to be the alter-ego of Nicola Coughlan’s character, Penelope Featherington.

But the Whistledown saga is a much smaller plot point in the books.

Advertisement

Although the notorious columns appear in the novels at the beginning of some chapters, it’s not revealed who is actually behind them until the fourth novel.

In the books, Colin learns about Penelope’s alter ego before Eloise, and even before he proposes. Conversely, in the Netflix series, Eloise learns that her close friend, Penelope, is Lady Whistledown at the end of season two, which causes a rift between them.

Meanwhile, because Queen Charlotte is not a character, there isn’t an investigation into Lady Whistledown in the novels.

As for why they kept Colin in the dark for so long about his love interest’s hobby in the show, showrunner Jess Brownwell told Vanity Fair: “After Colin took so long to figure out his feelings for Penelope, we wanted to live in the love bubble between Colin and Pen a little bit longer before the Whistledown secret came out.”

Advertisement

She pointed out: “It also amps up the tension for him to find out when he does, because Pen has now held it from him much longer than she should have.”

Jess also didn’t want to keep viewers in the dark for as long as the book did readers, mainly because she realised people could just Google Whistledown’s identity, which had already been revealed in the books by the time the show came out.

Bridgerton’s controversial season one sex scene is much less consensual in the book

Regé-Jean Page and Phoebe Dynevor's characters' romance took centre stage in season one of Bridgerton
Regé-Jean Page and Phoebe Dynevor’s characters’ romance took centre stage in season one of Bridgerton

When executive producer Shonda Rhimes revealed she would be producing an adaptation of the Bridgerton books, readers wondered how the writers would deal with a controversial non-consensual sex scene.

In The Duke And I, Daphne (played in the show by Phoebe Dynevor) takes advantage of a drunken Simon (Regé-Jean Page) and coerces him into having sex without using the pull-out method.

Advertisement

The series still followed this plot, although they made it a little less controversial, with the couple having consensual sex, and Daphne switching position midway through so Simon physically as not able to pull out. Although the moment is much less creepy than in the 2000 book, it still earned a response from audiences who felt it was still “marred with dubious consent”.

Responding to the backlash former showrunner Chris Van Dusen told Esquire: “We are a show that allows our female characters to be complicated and to be far from perfect. They often have to make complicated choices.

“In the writers’ room, we discussed that scene at length. We felt that the female characters on this show – Daphne, especially should be allowed to do just that.”

Season one lead Regé-Jean Page also told Oprah mag that he was “very happy that we had a different scene in the TV show than in the book”.

Advertisement

The Bridgerton novels’ Sheffield sisters became the Sharma sisters in season two

Simone Ashley and Charithra Chandran joined Bridgerton in its second season
Simone Ashley and Charithra Chandran joined Bridgerton in its second season

One of the biggest changes between season two of Bridgerton and the books is the background of the Sharma sisters.

In the book The Viscount Who Loved Me, Simone Ashley’s Kate and Charithra Chandran’s Edwina are described as blonde, pale-skinned English women with the surname Sheffield. In the show, the pair come from India to try and find Edwina a husband.

Executive producer Shonda Rhimes explained to Town & Country that making the girls South Asian was a “very simple choice.”

“I wanted to feel like the world we were living in was as three-dimensional as possible, and I wanted to feel like the representation was as three-dimensional as possible, too,” she said.

Advertisement

“Finding some South Asian women with darker skin and making sure that they were represented on screen authentically and truthfully feels like something that we haven’t seen nearly enough of. I felt like it was time for us to make sure that we were seeing as much as possible.”

Anthony and Kate’s relationship also plays out a little differently in the Bridgerton books

Season two’s love triangle plot was invented purely for the Bridgerton series.

In the novels, Anthony never proposes to Edwina, nor does Edwina ever get jealous of her sister’s romance with the Bridgerton brother.

Advertisement

The TV show evolves Edwina into a much more complex character, which changes the entire tone of their story.

Edwina Sharma and Kate Sharma became embroiled in something of a love triangle with Jonathan Bailey's Anthony Bridgerton in season two
Edwina Sharma and Kate Sharma became embroiled in something of a love triangle with Jonathan Bailey’s Anthony Bridgerton in season two

Benedict’s attitude towards Sophie in season four of Bridgerton is very different in the book An Offer From A Gentleman

The recent fourth season of Bridgerton is based on the novel An Offer From A Gentleman, and one of the key differences between the show and the book is Luke Thompson’s character’s attitude towards Sophie, played by newcomer Yerin Ha.

While the recent episodes show Benedict acting in a kind and accommodating way towards Sophie, readers of the books have branded him a “controlling and manipulative jerk”.

As someone on Goodreads noted after checking out the novel: “Where the hell is that artsy, coy, carefree, vulnerable, bisexual Benedict that we saw on the streaming series?”

Advertisement

Benedict is much nicer in the show, but he isn’t without his faults, one example being the divisive moment he asks Sophie to be his mistress.

In the novel, Benedict blackmails Sophie into becoming his mistress because he can’t marry someone of her lower social class.

Showrunner Jess knows that it would be unappealing to bring the character to life exactly as in the book.

“We wanted to make sure that we preserved the character’s thoughtfulness and the character’s sensitivity, which again is a big credit to Luke Thompson and what he brings to the character,” she claimed to Town & Country.

Advertisement
Benedict and Sophie's romance is a lot easier to root for in the Bridgerton series than the books
Benedict and Sophie’s romance is a lot easier to root for in the Bridgerton series than the books

Bridgerton’s writers turned Sophie into a Korean character in season four to honour the actor Yerin Ha

In the book, Sophie Beckett is depicted as the illegitimate, blonde daughter of the Earl of Penwood.

In season four of the Netflix series, she becomes Sophia Baek, a descendant of the Earl, who is working as a maid. This change isn’t just a switch in surname, it makes space for Yerin Ha’s Korean identity.

“A name is the first bit of identity that you share with the world, and that’s why changing a name can be so powerful,” Yerin told Tudum last year.

“To make Sophie’s name fit someone who looks like me is really empowering. All credit to Jess Brownell, our showrunner.”

Advertisement

It’s not just Sophie who gets a name change in the recent series. Araminta Gunningworth becomes Aramint Gun while her daughters, Posy and Rosamund, get the surname of Li, unlike their book name, Reiling.

Sophie and Benedict's forbidden romance is the major storyline of Bridgerton's fourth season
Sophie and Benedict’s forbidden romance is the major storyline of Bridgerton’s fourth season

Michael Stirling has been gender-swapped in the Netflix series to create Bridgerton’s first queer lead romance

When Bridgerton introduced Michaela Stirling in season three, it marked one of the series’ biggest departures from Julia Quinn’s source material.

In the original book series, Francesca Bridgerton falls in love with Michael Stirling, a male friend of her late husband John. The show has transformed this character into a woman, named Michaela, played by Masali Baduza.

As a future season is set to put Francesca’s love life front and centre, this will mark the first time the show’s central romance has been between a same-sex couple.

Advertisement

“I’m really, really excited to tell this story and also give it the platform it deserves, like a leading storyline, not additional characters,” Hannah Dodd told Refinery 29 Australia.

Masali agreed: “I think everyone’s story deserves to be told, and in Bridgerton, a lot of the characters are growing into themselves and learning new things about themselves.

“I think that the show accepts that, I think it’s important for everyone else to accept that too, and hopefully that can be reflected back into society.”

Masali Baduza as Michaela and Hannah Dodd as Francesca Bridgerton as seen in the latest drop of Bridgerton episodes
Masali Baduza as Michaela and Hannah Dodd as Francesca Bridgerton as seen in the latest drop of Bridgerton episodes

Following Michaela’s arrival in season three, Julia defended the changes, acknowledging that while some people would be “disappointed”, she had actually worked with the Bridgerton team to agree to the decision.

“Anyone who has seen an interview with me from the past four years knows that I am deeply committed to the Bridgerton world becoming more diverse and inclusive as the stories move from book to screen,” Julia Quinn wrote in a statement.

Advertisement

Bridgerton season four didn’t include a storyline about Francesca’s miscarriage

Season four touches on a few storylines outlined in the book When He Was Wicked, in which Francesca Bridgerton is the main character.

In both the book and the TV show, Francesca thinks she is pregnant after her husband John tragically dies. While in the TV show, this is later discovered to be a false alarm, in the books, Francesca actually miscarries after her sudden loss.

Jess admitted in an interview from earlier this year that she felt incorporating the miscarriage plot felt too “morbid” for the TV series.

Advertisement

“Ultimately, I think John’s death and the funeral are already in so many ways such a departure from the tone of the show,” she told Swooon.

“I think episode seven has hints of lightness, but it is a much darker version of Bridgerton in a way that I think is really interesting, and especially in the way we get to watch the family come together.”

Hannah Dodd's Francesca has a lot to deal with in the fourth season of Bridgerton
Hannah Dodd’s Francesca has a lot to deal with in the fourth season of Bridgerton

Penelope Featherington’s sister Felicity is completely omitted from the Bridgerton TV series

In the books, Penelope has a younger sister called Felicity, who has been totally excluded from the Bridgerton TV show.

This decision was made from the very beginning of the show by Shonda Rhimes, who felt that four Featherington sisters would be too hard to characterise.

Advertisement

Jess Brownell told TV Insider in 2024: “The main dramatic purpose of the Featherington sisters, they’ve obviously been comedic relief, but they’re there to play as a foil to Penelope.”

She added that the writers decided to completely cut Felicity as a way to push Penelope’s character forward more, and remove an unnecessary obstacle in her romance with Colin.

“I think dramatically it helped Pen [in the show] feel even more isolated and alone and underscored her plight to have her be in this viper’s nest with her sisters who are not very nice to her, and her mother who underestimates her,” she recalled. “So, we ended up really not needing that character.”

Benedict Bridgerton is straight in the novels, unlike his pansexual on-screen counterpart

Advertisement
Luke Thompson in character as Benedict Bridgerton
Luke Thompson in character as Benedict Bridgerton

In Julia Quinn’s book series, Benedict is explicitly straight, but on-screen, his sexuality is a little more complicated.

Season one includes hints that the Bridgerton brother is queer, which is confirmed in season three, when he engages in a tryst with Lady Tilley Arnold and her lover, Paul Suarez.

Talking to Glamour in 2024, Jess Brownell explained that she and the show’s other writers had planned Benedict’s sexuality reveal since season one in 2020.

“We just had never found the exact right way to execute it. I felt like it was this dangling thread that I wanted to make sense of, because I do think it makes sense for Benedict’s character,” Jess explained.

While the show has not put a label on his sexuality, Luke Thompson has said he believes Benedict is pansexual, because he’s “attracted to the way that someone thinks and feels, regardless of gender.”

Advertisement

“That’s a word that could be used. But what’s refreshing about it, certainly in the way that it’s being discovered at the moment, is that there is a sense of label-lessness about it,” Luke told Bustle in 2024.

Changing Benedict’s sexuality allowed the show to write a beautiful and important coming out scene between him and his wife-to-be Sophie in season four.

Marina Thompson is a totally different character in the TV show

Luke Newton and Ruby Barker on set in the early years of Bridgerton
Luke Newton and Ruby Barker on set in the early years of Bridgerton

A supporting character in the first season of Bridgerton, Marina Thompson doesn’t get a mention in the book series until the fifth instalment, To Sir Phillip, With Love.

In the source material, the character isn’t a Featherington cousin, either, and is actually a distant Bridgerton.

Advertisement

She is written as the first wife of Eloise’s love interest, Phillip, who tries to take her own life by walking into a river, eventually contracting a lung infection and dying days after she is saved.

Eloise bonds with Phillip when she sends a condolence letter to the widow, who never appears as a present character, as she died before the events of the novel.

In the TV show, Marina’s character is much more fleshed, with some fans noting that she feels like a totally different character. As a result, the plot in which she falls pregnant out of wedlock, and tries to trick Colin into marriage was a brand-new one for TV viewers.

“We’re really looking at the show as the evolution of a woman,” Chris Van Dusen told Oprah magazine about expanding Marina’s character. “Her story is a big part of that.

Advertisement

“We get to explore mindsets [that] become so normalised over time. Like sexism and misogyny, and the ways women have been treated for centuries.”

Cressida and Eloise’s friendship plays out very differently on-screen

Eloise bonds with Cressida after falling out with Penelope in Bridgerton
Eloise bonds with Cressida after falling out with Penelope in Bridgerton

One development that didn’t occur in the books was the season three alliance between Eloise and Jess Madsen’s character, Cressida. This friendship forms as a result of the rift that grows in Eloise and Penelope’s friendship, which doesn’t happen in the novels.

In the book Romancing Mr. Bridgerton, Cressida is a one-dimensional, malicious bully, but her character is fleshed out in the Netflix series.

Jess told Business Insider that Cressida’s friendship with Eloise opens her up and makes her less cruel.

Advertisement

“She’s changing, and they hold a beautiful mirror up to each other,” she said. “They’re not defensive, and they do hold a mirror up being like, ‘What you did wasn’t cool’.

“I love a mean-girl character, but even more, I love understanding why a mean girl is a mean girl. Because mean girls are not born, they’re made.”

All four seasons of Bridgerton are now streaming on Netflix.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Therapists Explain Why Protecting Kids From Anxiety Is Bad

Published

on

Never making kids face the thing that makes them anxious will only impede their confidence.

No parent wants to sit back and watch their child experience anxiety over any situation, whether it’s going to a new dance school, a football game, trying new food or meeting new kids at school.

And while most parents have the best intentions, many actually come to their child’s rescue during moments of distress – which can be hugely detrimental to their child now and as they grow up, therapists told HuffPost.

The best way to help your child grow through anxiety and learn to manage it isn’t exactly a natural instinct. Here’s what to know:

The number one way parents fuel anxiety, according to therapists

Advertisement

“I think, in particular with anxiety … the biggest mistake that we make as parents is that when we see anxiety in our kids, we jump straight into that ‘I want to protect this child from this experience.’ So, we go straight to protection mode,” said Cheryl Donaldson, a licensed marriage and family therapist.

Parents don’t want their kids to feel anxiety, of course, but swooping in to take them out of an anxious situation or fix it for them isn’t a way to empower kids, Donaldson noted. It’s actually doing the opposite.

Research suggests that accommodating anxiety makes it worse, said Hannah Scheuer, a licensed clinical social worker with Self Space in Washington state.

“I’m both a child and family therapist and a mom, and I’m just gonna say that watching our child struggle and suffer is one of the hardest things,” Scheuer said. “And if we accommodate and give in, we will make it worse. Accommodation is essentially allowing avoidance, and avoidance feels really, really good in the moment, even to adults.”

Advertisement

For instance, if your teenager is anxious about driving on the highway, avoiding it when teaching them to drive only makes the experience scarier and more stressful when they eventually have to do it.

“It just makes it worse and worse, it leads to long-term negative outcomes,” Scheuer said. “That accommodation, that saying, ‘Oh no, you don’t have to do this thing that you’re upset about or scared of,’ it does temporarily alleviate that child’s distress. Then, what it reinforces is this perception that the thing that they don’t want to do actually warrants their anxiety, and so that gives them more reason to feel the anxiety.”

“Anxiety is our body’s mechanism to tell us that we either need to act in some way … or, in the case of kids, anxiety is telling them, ‘This is a new skill I need. This is a new experience. I need more skills. I need to know how to manage this,’” Donaldson said.

It’s important to validate your child’s emotions while supporting them through anxiety

Advertisement

Supporting children through anxious moments takes a three-fold approach, said Laura Buscemi, a licensed professional counsellor at Thriveworks in Cherry Hill, New Jersey.

“We have to validate, we have to regulate and we have to mitigate,” she said.

Validation looks like normalising the anxiety and sharing that it’s something we all experience, Buscemi said. Regulation means helping your child learn to manage their anxiety through a variety of solutions, like breathing exercises and movement. Mitigation helps a child understand that temporary discomfort, such as facing the situation that makes them anxious, leads to long-term relief.

“Facing fears ultimately decreases them – and we prove to ourselves that things aren’t as scary as we’ve built up in our mind, or that maybe we’re just braver than it was scary,” Buscemi said.

Advertisement

“The research evidence does also show that what we need to do as parents is to provide support and confidence,” Scheuer noted. “What that looks like is supporting and validating the feelings while also showing confidence in their child’s ability to actually do the thing to cope with the anxiety.”

For example, if your child gets really anxious about going to football practice and has meltdowns in the car on the way to practice, a parent could say, “Wow, I hear you. I know you’re feeling really scared and upset right now, but I also know that you can do really hard things and you’re going to be OK,” Scheuer suggested.

“It’s that mix of validation of the feeling, without accommodating the anxiety and providing confidence that they can do it,” Scheuer explained. This one sentence isn’t going to erase your child’s anxiety and stop the meltdown, but as this encouragement comes up week after week, soccer will feel less and less hard for your child.

“And continuing to inspire that confidence … is going to really make a big impact, and that’s how we build resilient kids,” Scheuer said.

Advertisement
Never making kids face the thing that makes them anxious will only impede their confidence.

Justin Paget via Getty Images

Never making kids face the thing that makes them anxious will only impede their confidence.

Some kids (and parents) require professional support for anxiety management

Many parents will be able to manage their kids’ anxiety through different calming and exposure techniques, but some kids (and parents) may require additional support from a mental health professional – and that’s perfectly OK.

There are certain signs that a child’s anxiety requires support from a therapist or other professional.

“If the anxiety is getting in the way of them being able to be in a relationship with other kids, go to a friend’s house … being able to go to practices and do different things, you want to reach out for help,” Donaldson said.

Advertisement

If you notice your child frequently worrying or frequently in distress, those are also red flags.

“Also, with younger kids, they don’t really have the language to talk about anxiety, so sometimes we see it as like more physical symptoms,” Scheuer noted. This includes stomachaches, having trouble sleeping, and general restlessness.

“That is something that I would say, if that’s pretty common, maybe they need some extra support,” Scheuer said.

If therapy or counselling isn’t accessible, your child’s school should have a social worker or school counsellor who can provide support, Scheuer said. Talking to your paediatrician could also be a good idea.

Advertisement

Managing anxiety in kids often involves the parents, especially if the kids are younger.

“So, it’s not just saying, ‘Oh, fix the kid’s symptoms.’ It’s also … what strategies can we give to the parents to help really make sure that everybody has the tools to help this kid navigate these symptoms?” Scheuer said.

It’s also on the parents to consider how they react to anxious moments in their lives. Think about it: if mum or dad doesn’t know how to manage their own anxiety, they likely won’t be able to help their child, either.

Ask yourself what you feel when your child gets anxious. Does it make you anxious, too? If so, what do you do to calm down?

Advertisement

“Leading with your own leadership” is an important way to go about this, according to Donaldson. If you know deep breathing helps you feel less anxious, gently guide your child toward that. Or, if you know that getting out for a walk reduces your anxiety, gently encourage your child to try it.

“You want them to know that you’re partnering, that you have answers that are going to be really helpful for them,” Donaldson said.

If other techniques and interventions don’t work, “sometimes the kids need to go on medication,” Donaldson noted.

Watching your child experience anxiety isn’t a pleasant experience for anyone, but it helps build life skills and confidence that are tough to grow later in life. The ability to live with discomfort and manage anxiety is important throughout the lifespan, as someone takes a big test, gets their first job, experiences their first break-up, faces job rejection and more.

Advertisement

“I really like to emphasise with my clients that we’re trying to push through temporary discomfort to achieve long-term relief,” Buscemi said.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Labour’s Islamophobia ban spells the death of English liberty

Published

on

Labour’s Islamophobia ban spells the death of English liberty

There is a schoolteacher in England whose name I cannot tell you, because he was forced to change it. In March 2021, he showed his year nine class at West Yorkshire’s Batley Grammar School a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad – a reproduction of the infamous Charlie Hebdo cartoon from 2015 – as part of a lesson on blasphemy. It was five months after Samuel Paty, a French teacher who had conducted a similar lesson, was beheaded by a jihadist in a suburb of Paris. One might have expected, in the aftermath of a colleague’s decapitation, some institutional solidarity. One would have been naive.

A mob formed. Death threats followed. The Batley teacher’s children slept on mattresses on the floor in temporary accommodation. The headteacher ‘unequivocally’ apologised for the offence caused – a sentence that, if British liberalism ever requires an epitaph, would serve admirably. The teacher was suspended. He was later cleared, but it made no difference. He developed PTSD and became suicidal. When he visited a police station after relocating, officers told him he had ‘made it harder for them by moving’. Dame Sara Khan’s government-commissioned review described him as ‘totally and utterly failed’ by every institution that owed him protection. Five years on, he remains in hiding. Nobody has been arrested for threatening his life. No politician of any consequence has dared say his name.

I begin here because the government’s new 47-page cohesion strategy, Protecting What Matters, begins with him, too. It promises to ‘stand against those who try to intimidate, threaten and harass others because they are offended by so-called “blasphemy”’. It declares: ‘We do not recognise blasphemy law in the UK.’ And then, with exquisite bureaucratic care, it then constructs the apparatus of one. It builds the scaffold and hangs a sign on it reading, ‘Not A Scaffold’.

Advertisement

For this cohesion strategy contains Labour’s non-statutory definition of ‘anti-Muslim hostility’. On the same day it was released, communities secretary Steve Reed announced the appointment of an anti-Muslim-hostility tsar (because this is how we govern now) to ‘champion efforts across the UK to tackle hostility and hatred directed at Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim’. Four million pounds have been committed to the task.

The timing is instructive. Reed’s announcement arrived within 10 days of Labour losing the Gorton and Denton by-election, a seat held since 1935, to the Greens, after Muslim voters deserted Labour over Gaza. It also came days after Starmer praised British Muslims as ‘the face of modern Britain’ at a Ramadan iftar. The cause of this policy was not a review of evidence. It was the count at a leisure centre in Greater Manchester at two o’clock in the morning.

Advertisement

Enjoying spiked?

Why not make an instant, one-off donation?

We are funded by you. Thank you!

Advertisement




Please wait…

Advertisement
Advertisement

Credit where it is due. The government has abandoned the word ‘Islamophobia’. The old definition, adopted in 2019 by Labour for internal party matters, and by some 50 local councils, defined Islamophobia as ‘a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness’. This was always a category error masquerading as moral insight: Islam is not a race and the Equality Act does not recognise Muslims as an ethnic group. Most remarkably, the report accompanying the definition listed as an example of Islamophobia the act of accusing Muslims of exaggerating Islamophobia. The definition was immunised against its own critique. One could not challenge the framework of Islamophobia without being branded Islamophobic.

The replacement definition drops ‘Muslimness’ and ‘racism’. These are genuine improvements on a definition so catastrophically flawed that the government had to disown it last year. However, to celebrate this is to congratulate a man for removing his boot from your throat only to place it on your chest.

Advertisement

Now, examine the new definition, because the language is everything, and Orwell would have spotted the trick at a glance. Its first paragraph condemns criminal acts directed at Muslims: violence, vandalism, harassment. Every behaviour described is already illegal under the Public Order Act, the Equality Act, the Crime and Disorder Act and the Protection from Harassment Act. Reed told the Commons that, ‘You can’t tackle a problem if you can’t describe it’. But these problems are already described, in legislation carrying criminal penalties. If the definition is not redundant, then it is intended to do something the law does not. We are entitled to ask what.

The second paragraph provides the answer. It condemns ‘prejudicial stereotyping’ of Muslims, ‘irrespective of their actual opinions, beliefs or actions as individuals’. Attend to that clause, because it does the heavy lifting. The government has written a definition in which the truth of a claim is explicitly irrelevant to whether stating it constitutes ‘stereotyping’. If polling shows 52 per cent of British Muslims believe homosexuality should be illegal, is citing that figure prejudice or sociology? If Protecting What Matters itself acknowledges the threat of Islamist extremism – accounting for three quarters of the police’s counter-terror workload and 94 per cent of all terror-related deaths in the past 25 years – is observing this a stereotype? The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism, for all its flaws, provides eleven illustrative examples. The anti-Muslim hostility definition, in contrast, offers three paragraphs of abstract language and no examples at all. That vagueness is not an oversight. It is the mechanism. It is the chilling effect itself.

Reed assures parliament that there is ‘absolutely no question of blasphemy laws by the back door’. One has heard this before. Every government crackdown on speech is accompanied by the insistence that free speech will be protected. The Online Safety Act said this. The 2019 Islamophobia definition said it, too.

Advertisement

But these assurances simply won’t wash. In 2020, Trevor Phillips, a former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, was suspended from Labour for ‘Islamophobia’ when all he did was cite the disproportionate involvement of Pakistani Muslim men in grooming-gang cases. In Rotherham, Rochdale and Telford, professionals hesitated to investigate child sexual exploitation for fear of the accusation. In 2022, Cineworld pulled The Lady of Heaven – a film about the daughter of Muhammad – from every screen in the country after protests. This has been happening for years, even without a government-endorsed definition, which will now formalise, validate and accelerate a pattern already well established.

Against this, England possesses one legislative safeguard of extraordinary clarity. Section 29J of the Public Order Act (the Waddington Amendment) provides that nothing shall prohibit ‘discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents’. Note the sweep: not merely criticism but ridicule, insult and abuse. The new definition does not repeal Section 29J. It builds a parallel architecture of codes, guidance and tsars in every space where 29J does not apply: universities, workplaces, councils, the NHS. One system protects the right to ridicule religion. The other makes exercising it professionally suicidal.

The most important feature of this debate is who the critics of the government’s definition are. Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s own terrorism-legislation reviewer, warned he was ‘against an Islamophobia definition because it’s directed at a thing, at religion, rather than an anti-Muslim hatred law, which is about protecting people’. Fiyaz Mughal, founder of Tell MAMA – an organisation that records anti-Muslim hate in the UK – warned the process could be exploited by ‘Islamist groups and those affiliated with Muslim Brotherhood front groups’. The National Secular Society called it ‘unnecessary and misguided’.

Advertisement

These are not GB News talking heads. They are liberals, secularists and Muslims who understand something the government will not grasp: that the people most harmed are not comfortable commentators but the vulnerable: ex-Muslims facing death threats for apostasy, Muslim women suffering from honour-based violence, grooming-gang survivors whose testimony was buried because professionals feared the accusation. For these people, the free criticism of Islam is not an intellectual luxury. It is a matter of physical survival.

No religion deserves its own tsar. To assault a Muslim is a crime. To discriminate against a Muslim is unlawful. But to say Islam promotes the subordination of women is not a crime. To mock the proposition that a seventh-century Arabian merchant received the final revelation of the creator of the universe is not a crime. The capacity to give offence is not an unfortunate byproduct of free speech. It is its essential purpose. This is not about protecting Muslims from hatred. It is about protecting Islam from criticism. Those are two completely different things.

Advertisement

England abolished its blasphemy laws in 2008, after a struggle that ran from Milton through Mill through the imprisonment of Charles Bradlaugh to the final repeal. Somewhere in England, a teacher who exercised those hard-won freedoms cannot go home. Protecting What Matters expresses sympathy with him and promises to stand against those who harassed him. Then, with four million pounds and a freshly minted tsar, it builds a machine that seems almost designed to produce the next Batley-style outrage.

Owen Shapell is PhD researcher in social sciences.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Riyad al-Amour dies after years of torture in Israeli prisons

Published

on

Riyad al-Amour dies after years of torture in Israeli prisons

After years of systematic torture and medical neglect in Israeli occupation prisons, former Palestinian political prisoner, Riyad al-Amour, has died.

Riyad al-Amour — 23 years of torture and abuse in Israeli occupation prisons

56-year-old Riyad al-Amour, from the village of Tuqu’ in Bethlehem, was arrested in 2002 and spent 23 years behind bars, before being released and exiled to Egypt as part of the most recent prisoner exchange during the so-called ceasefire agreement in October 2025.

In a statement, on 3 April, the Palestinian Prisoner’s Society & Commission of Detainees’ Affairs said they “hold occupation authorities fully responsible for his death”. Al Amour endured prolonged interrogations and severe torture while in prison, causing him to lose hearing in one of his ears. He also suffered serious medical neglect, and was denied a new pacemaker by the occupation’s prison services for more than a decade.

 His health was critical when he was released so he underwent multiple surgeries in the brief six months he spent outside prison before passing away.

Advertisement

The most violent period in the Palestinian prisoner movement has been since October 2023

Despite the harsh conditions he faced and the torture he endured, al Amour devoted years of his detention to serving fellow sick prisoners in the “Ramla Prison Clinic,” where he spent most of his imprisonment.

The last two years has become the most violent in the history of the Palestinian prisoner movement. Physicians for Human Rights-Israel revealed the details of almost 100 Palestinian prisoners killed while in Israeli occupation detention, since 7 October, 2023. All died from medical neglect, malnutrition, assault or torture.

The United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT) claims that the Israeli occupation’s torture and neglect of Palestinian prisoners is a “deliberate state policy of collective punishment“.

His death comes just days after the Israeli occupation’s approval of a law which legalises the execution of Palestinian political prisoners.

Advertisement

Featured image via author 

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump praises Allah in bizarre Easter message

Published

on

Trump praises Allah in bizarre Easter message

In a bizarre and violent Easter Sunday message, Donald Trump has praised Allah. While there’s nothing wrong with a man praising a god in any language, it does read a little perversely when he’s simultaneously threatening war crimes against the Muslim nation of Iran:

Trump — War crimes

While the above is shorter than a lot of Trump’s recent rants, there’s still a lot to highlight. Firstly, the opener:

Advertisement

Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran.

Trump is threatening to repeat the attacks on power plants and bridges which the US has already subjected Iran too. As attacking civilian infrastructure is a war crime, this means Trump is openly threatening to commit war crimes.

In future generations, people will ask why American politicians didn’t move to remove Trump when he was blatantly threatening to violate international law. Hopefully, said politicians will be answering such questions from their prison cells.

Next, Trump said:

There will be nothing like it!!!

By this, he means ‘nothing like it besides the previously committed war crimes I just admitted to‘.

Advertisement

He continued:

Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell

Not sure you get to call people “crazy” when you’re the one who started this futile war in the first place.

The US and Israel have repeatedly attacked Iran despite peace talks continuing. Arguably, Iran’s response has been incredibly rational.

To avoid any risk of the US provoking a conflict every twelve months, they’ve sought to demonstrate how costly hostilities will be. “Crazy” would be for them to engage with Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu as if they were honest actors.

Advertisement

As we’ve reported, Trump appears to be counting down towards some sort of extreme event:

Advertisement

Praise be

Trump ends with what’s presumably sarcasm (we can’t say definitively, because he’s clearly not with it):

Praise be to Allah.

If Trump’s hoping to come out of this looking good, he’s going to need to send praise to more than Allah. Because at this point, nothing less than a miracle is going to clean up his mess.

This is a hell of a message for the American President to put out on Easter, anyway — especially considering he’s the candidate of choice for the American evangelicals.

Featured image via White House

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Reform UK nosedive in Scotland following candidate chaos

Published

on

Reform UK nosedive in Scotland following candidate chaos

As we’ve reported, Reform UK is having a nightmarish local election campaign. Now, these problems are starting to bear out in polling:

Anti-campaigning

Diving deeper into the polls, the Times’ Dan Sanderson noted:

As he further reported, Reform’s polling is at its lowest level in over a year. This is a bad situation for Reform considering they’re in the runup to elections. With five weeks left, too, things could still get worse.

Sanderson added:

Lord Offord of Garvel, anointed by Farage as Reform UK’s Scottish leader in January, has made a succession of gaffes and faced intense scrutiny for a racist and homophobic joke he told at a rugby club dinner in 2018. He has since apologised for the joke, saying he “accepts accountability”.

We reported on lord Offal of Garble in December 2025, noting it was Boris Johnson who made him a peer. In other words, he’s yet another one of the Tory rejects Reform has accepted in the past 12 months.

Advertisement

In a piece about Reform UK suspending Scottish candidates, Skwawkbox wrote the following for the Canary on 21 March:

Hilariously, Reform’s Scottish head Malcolm Offord just boasted to the BBC’s Radio Scotland about how much time the party had spent vetting candidates and claimed all they had found was instances of candidates saying “something fruity in the past”.

Reform have lost more Scottish candidates since then too:

Regarding Reform UK’s local election woes, we’ve additionally reported the following:

Reform UK — Nationwide slide

Earlier today, we reported that the Greens had drawn level with Reform in one national poll. Since then, Stats for Lefties have shown that the Greens were actually slightly ahead:

As Novara’s Aaron Bastani highlighted, this is historic:

The first time in British history that the Greens have topped a national poll for Westminster.

Despite whatever talking points you’ll hear in legacy media my sense is they are gently nibbling into people who were considering Reform.

With five weeks left until the local elections, the Greens look increasingly well positioned to upset Reform’s predicted upset:

Advertisement

Featured image via Pixabay (via Canva)

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Labour ‘s disgraced minister blames scandal on being ’30 years old’

Published

on

Labour 's disgraced minister blames scandal on being '30 years old'

Josh Simons is Labour’s ex-minister who was forced to resign from government. The scandal which led to his downfall revolved around Simons having private investigators look into journalists for the crime of doing journalism.

And while that sounds bad, have you considered that Simons may have been a tender, wee boy of just 30 when he did it?

Making of a scandal

We were reporting on Simons dubious activities back in September 2025. The following came from investigative journalist Paul Holden who wrote The Fraud – an exposé on Keir Starmer and Labour Together:

Advertisement

Paul Holden said he had been “pretty damn scared” when he found out that Labour Together had “set the hounds on me”. McSweeney is a chief architect of the antisemitism scam against Jeremy Corbyn and attempts to destroy the Canary.

Holden also claims that former Labour Together director Josh Simons, now a Cabinet Office Minister, was at the least aware of the group’s decision to set the investigators onto him, telling the Mail that:

“It was all very worrying. I was told these private detectives were looking into me, my family and my colleagues – all at the request of Labour Together.

“I could only assume they were digging dirt to discredit me or my research. The investigators were trying to find out how I was getting all my information – not challenge its accuracy.”

The Labour Together spying story wouldn’t become a national scandal until it was revealed they also spied on mainstream journalists – namely those at the Times.

Advertisement

Reporting on Simons resignation, Skwawkbox wrote the following for the Canary on 28 February:

From 2022 to 2024, Simons ran the sabotage outfit, Labour Togther. He took over after disgraced Morgan McSweeney moved on to become Keir Starmer’s (now former) chief of staff. However, Simons has not resigned his parliamentary seat.

All too typically, the resignation letter is full of self-exoneration and excuses. Instead of taking responsibility, the letter leans on Simons’s supposed vindication by Sir Laurie Magnus. Magnus is the supposedly ‘independent’ adviser on ministerial standards. This is farcical, when Simons’s own leaked WhatsApp messages revealed that Starmer had told Magnus to conduct only a fast (i.e cursory) investigation.

With a complete failure of self-awareness, Simons frames his departure in terms of the public’s justified low trust in politicians. And, like any good Israel apologist, he had to slip in a spurious reference to so-called ‘Labour antisemitism’ to smear the diligent, professional, independent authors, and journalists who exposed Labour Together.

It was far from the only time Simons blamed his mistakes on alleged antisemitism:

Advertisement

Obviously receiving diminishing returns from the antisemitism card, Simons is now blaming his mistakes on his age.

Disgraced Labour minister — A boy of just 30

The post at the top about Simons being a mere 30 years old is from Times Radio producer Ollie Cole. Seemingly, the text hasn’t been published online yet, because a verbatim google search produces no results.

It reads in full:

Advertisement

Former labour minister Josh Simons has told Times Radio that “I was 30 years old, I didn’t read the contract very carefully,” when asked about commissioning a report into the background of two Sunday Times journalists while working for Labour Together.

Ah yes, the famous stereotype about 30-year-olds being unable to read somewhat complicated documents.

A year later – when Simons was 31 – he would be in government and deciding on legislation. Presumably, at some point between 30 and 31, the text-understanding cortex of his brain developed, and he was able to read important documents as needed.

It really is farcical, isn’t it?

Featured image via Amazon

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Pam Bondi Booted

Published

on

Pam Bondi Booted

!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”7afb52c2-e638-43a3-a8c1-62857594765f”}).render(“69ceea80e4b05537a7f0899f”);});

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Backstreet Boy Beach Confrontation

Published

on

Backstreet Boy Beach Confrontation

!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”0a9a01ee-ba07-4479-b1ba-4fddee74cc87″}).render(“69cf06aee4b05537a7f09179”);});

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

The Religious Meaning Behind Hot Cross Buns

Published

on

The Religious Meaning Behind Hot Cross Buns

An Easter staple, hot cross buns are believed to date back to 1361.

Some say their precursor, called Alban buns, was invented by a monk called Brother Thomas Rocliffe at St Alban’s Abbey. He is said to have given them to the poor on Good Friday.

They’re slightly different to the ones we know and love today – the cross on top was cut into the bun, rather than placed on top with a flour mixture – but they still contained spices, fruit, and yeasted dough.

Given their possible religious past, then, perhaps it’s not surprising that some think hot cross buns allude to more of the events of Easter than just the obvious cross.

Advertisement

What’s the meaning behind hot cross buns?

The cross on top of the buns may have been placed on buns like Brother Roclliffe’s to allude to Jesus’ crucifix (Good Friday being “the day of the cross”).

But according to historian of food Dr Eleanor Barnett, hot cross buns weren’t really eaten as we know them now until the 18th century.

She also says not everyone agrees that they came from Brother Rocliffe: some think the origins date back to Ancient Greek crossed bread, while others think it has to do with Passover.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, Dr Barnett writes, the traditional ingredients are still “laden” with religious symbolism: “The bread is a nod to the Communion wafer, the spices represent the spices Christ was wrapped in in his tomb, and the cross is of course a reference to his crucifixion”.

Whatever their origin, they’ve proven somewhat divisive in the past. For instance, Queen Elizabeth I tried to tightly control the sale of buns because they looked a little too “Catholic” and “superstitious” for her taste.

“Perhaps they were associated with the blessed and crossed buns distributed by some Catholic churches on Good Friday, which were made from the same dough as the holy Eucharistic bread,” English Heritage shared.

Hot cross buns used to be considered lucky

Advertisement

Later, some believed that crumbling hot cross buns into water could cure them from illness. Victorian people would swap hot cross buns on Good Friday, saying, “Half for you and half for me, between us two good luck shall be”.

Others thought it could calm their stomachs, protect them from evil, keep pests away from grains, and never go mouldy.

Writing for The Conversation, historian Darius von Guttner Sporzynski said: “Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Poles, Romans, Saxons, medieval monks and 18th-century street sellers all had their versions of spiced, crossed bread. Each group gave the buns its own meaning, from honouring gods to celebrating Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Why It Feels Like Therapy Doesn’t Work For Your Child

Published

on

Why It Feels Like Therapy Doesn't Work For Your Child

We often hear the phrase: you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. It’s a useful way to think about therapy.

Therapy has enormous value. I believe in it both personally and professionally. It can offer insight, structure, and a safe space to explore difficult feelings, their origins, and what might be possible in the future. I say that as someone who has spent years training and working as a psychotherapist, and as someone who has also sat in the therapy room myself.

But something has been bothering me for some time now.

Therapy asks a great deal of the person in front of us. It asks them to take what is explored in a 50-minute session and carry it into the complexity of everyday life.

Advertisement

To notice thoughts in real time, reflect on feelings, and apply strategies when emotions are already running high. This relies on metacognition – the ability to think about one’s own thinking, to pause, reflect, and respond rather than react.

That is demanding for many adults. And even more so for children. Sometimes extremely hard.

In recent years, therapy – or long waiting lists for therapy – has become a default response to children experiencing anxiety, ADHD, ASD (autism), and emotional regulation difficulties. Yet many families reach the same point after weeks or months of sessions: why is nothing changing?

The answer is rarely that therapy “works” or “doesn’t work”. It is that there is often a mismatch between what therapy requires and what children are developmentally able to do.

Advertisement

Children live in the moment – therapy often asks them to step out of that moment

Children are still learning how to identify and express emotions. They are developing the ability to link cause and effect, to reflect on behaviour, and to pause before reacting. They live in the moment, whereas therapy often asks them to step out of the moment, reflect on it, and apply that understanding later.

This is not resistance. It is development.

Even approaches such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), which can be highly effective, rely on a child being able to notice, question, and shift their own thinking patterns. These are not simple skills – they are still under construction for many young people, and continue developing well into adolescence and early adulthood.

Advertisement

Short-term interventions can add another layer of difficulty. A child may be introduced to helpful ideas or strategies, but then expected to carry and apply them independently in real-life moments. For many children – particularly those with ADHD and autism – that is where the process breaks down.

And so we are left with an important question: are we sometimes placing too much emphasis on the therapy room itself?

When a child is struggling, it is easy for the narrative to centre on what is “wrong” within them. But in many cases, the difficulty sits in the interaction between the child and their environment. A busy classroom. A rushed morning routine. Sensory overload. Expectations that do not match how a child processes the world.

These are not background details, they are that person’s world.

Advertisement

So, rather than asking how to fix the child, we might begin to ask how to better support the environment around them – and how therapeutic ideas might be applied not just in sessions, but in everyday life.

This is where caregivers become central. And it can feel like an uncomfortable shift. Many parents are already stretched beyond capacity, and the idea that they hold so much influence can feel like added pressure. But it is also where the greatest opportunity lies.

Caregivers are present in the moments that matter most: the school run, the transition home, the moments of overwhelm, the recovery after distress. The ordinary, repeated experiences where emotional patterns are shaped and reshaped.

No 50-minute session can replicate that. What children often need is not just insight. They need practice. And not occasional practice, but supported, repeated, calm practice.

Advertisement

One way to understand this is through a “seed planting” approach.

In therapy, a child may be introduced to a strategy – perhaps breathing techniques, emotional labelling, or identifying what is within their control. But understanding a strategy is only the beginning.

For it to become useful, it must be revisited and practised in calm, safe moments. This is when the brain is most able to encode and store new learning. Over time, repetition builds pathways that make those strategies more accessible when stress rises.

Without this, expecting a child to use a strategy in the middle of distress is often unrealistic.

A simple analogy may help. Imagine standing in a large field and being asked to find your way to a specific point. The grass is long, the path unclear, and obstacles are hidden. It feels overwhelming.

Advertisement

Now imagine that same field, but this time a path has been cut through the grass. There are signposts along the way. A map has been drawn. Hazards have been identified and managed.

The destination is the same, but the experience is entirely different. Preparation changes what is possible.

Children need that preparation – not once, not in crisis, but over time, through repetition and relationship. These pathways are not built in a single session. They are built in daily life.

This is where the conversation around therapy becomes more nuanced.

Advertisement

We need to reimagine the role of therapy

It is not that therapy does not work (for areas such as attachment and relational trauma, it can be profoundly important, and I have seen this firsthand in my work in school settings), it is that therapy alone is often not enough.

For many children, particularly those who are neurodivergent, meaningful change happens when therapeutic ideas are woven into everyday life – when they are supported consistently, adapted to developmental stage, and held by the adults who are present day in, day out.

In that sense, the most effective support often happens outside the therapy room.

Advertisement

The challenge is not to abandon therapy, but to reimagine its role. To see it as one part of a wider system of support. And to recognise that the people best placed to bring that system to life are already there: caregivers.

For families navigating neurodiversity, anxiety, and emotional regulation difficulties, this shift can be powerful. It moves the focus away from whether a child is “failing” to engage with therapy, and towards how we can better support them to learn in a way that fits their development, their environment, and their needs.

This is why my practice has changed. I rarely see children directly in clinic now. Instead, I work with parents – equipping them with therapeutic tools that can be planted, practised, and nurtured over time. Tools that help them provide daily scaffolding in both calm and challenging moments.

Because children are not failing to use the tools they are given. More often, they are still learning how.

Advertisement

Psychotherapist Gee Eltringham is the founder of the parental care platform for ADHD families, twigged.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025