Bambi might get trolled over her name, but who cares if you’ve helped make Molly-Mae the world’s greatest mumfluencer?
ANOTHER day, another ’sleb has given birth and is champing at the bit to show off her gorgeous little bundle of joy.
Usually the new mum, wearing spotless make-up, holds their tot in perfectly manicured hands with a backdrop of a lavish nursery.
I can’t wait for the puke and sleepless nights, myself. Won’t be looking so perfect then.
This time it’s reality “star” Molly-Mae Hague, who, with partner Tommy Fury, has welcomed a daughter.
She is getting trolled for calling the newborn Bambi – but I think, why not?
It’s sweet enough.
Although her daughter may not enjoy the name once she gets to school age.
Or starts dating.
Hence, I chose a good trainspotter’s name for my youngest – Malcolm.
You can’t argue with that.
But much has been made of Molly-Mae’s flashy nursery, which includes a modern acrylic crib (whatever that is) priced at around £5k.
Of course, much of the criticism is based on envy.
Molly-Mae is entitled to do whatever she wants with her money.
But it reminded me of the pressure I felt to have everything perfect ahead of my first baby’s arrival.
It seemed that was all that mattered – neutral colours, the latest, best-quality products.
Until my English Nana quietly reminded me that she just put her firstborn in the top drawer of her bedroom dresser – and he turned out all right.
It was an important lesson.
It’s all too easy to concentrate on perfection when health and wellbeing should be the priorities ahead of the arrival.
Babies simply need to be fed and held and kept warm.
My subsequent babies were probably greeted by less folly, especially as my second child’s congenital heart defect meant I didn’t even know if I’d have a little one to bring home.
Mere mortals can only dream of a nursery like little Bambi’s, who will be utterly oblivious to the overindulgence surrounding her.
But then I suspect Bambi isn’t just any old newborn.
She’s going to help make Molly-Mae one of the greatest “mumfluencers” around.
She is welcomed to the world, nonetheless.
Children need to learn about sex but not from pop videos like Sam’s
NOW, I’m no prude.
I’m not easily shocked.
But Sam Smith has caused outrage in many quarters.
Some are accusing the singer of hyper-sexualised dancing in the music video for I’m Not Here To Make Friends and claim it is normalising pornography.
There are corsets, suspenders and nipple tassels.
There is thrusting on beds, by both men and women in bondage underwear.
Dancers are on all fours with a**es in the air, gyrating and simulating sex.
The whole theme has strong orgy undertones.
With lyrics including: “If you want it bad tonight . . . ” no one can deny the video is provocative.
I could argue this is art.
But it is also pornographic.
And with its accessibility on YouTube it can potentially reach children as young as five — and that might be a conservative guess.
I’m not offended.
I love Sam Smith’s music and voice.
But there is gravity to the criticism.
I was confused
It is no coincidence that in a new report by Children’s Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza, we learn a quarter of children have been exposed to porn before they leave primary school, and one in every ten kids has viewed it by age nine.
As one who was exposed to porn at too tender an age, by a careless father who left hardcore magazines lying around in our flat and even casually and irresponsibly let me bear witness to his sexual acts, I know how damaging this can be.
It distorts your view of sex and relationships, so with my kindergarten sex education running concurrently with this, no wonder I was confused.
In the educational setting I was told about the biology of sex, yet at home it felt sinful.
Neither scenario indicated enjoyment or pleasure.
Porn is increasingly geared toward sexual violence against women and the normalisation of that.
And it is widespread — 47 per cent of people aged 16 to 21 say girls expect sex to involve physical aggression, Dame Rachel’s report says.
It really is quite something when a 16-year-old girl thinks it’s normal for her boyfriend to restrict her airways when he goes in for the first kiss.
I was shocked to learn that Twitter is the platform where porn is most viewed by children — 41 per cent have seen it there.
So, social media.
Again.
I’m a liberal parent.
I’m a liberal adult.
I believe our children should be educated about both sex and relationships as soon as possible.
It can be made age appropriate.
You know me to be a proponent of nudity, but it goes without saying that many people blur the lines between the naked body and a sexual act.
The two are not always intrinsically linked.
As a society we have for years had a huge problem with sexual-isation of our children, and no one seems to know what to do.
Unless you apply parental controls, there is little restriction on what children view on YouTube.
So at home they can stream more or less what they like, yet at the cinema proof of age is required.
We have allowed a normalisation of porn.
Also, we omit reference to pleasure as we educate kids about sex — it is for breeding or brutality.
Then we wonder why this has such a impact on chil- dren’s understanding of sex.
And it’s as damaging for boys as girls.
While we have been keen to protect girls and promote an understanding that they should not have to endure threatening situations, put up with casual sexism and verbal or sexual assaults, we forget the conversation needs to be had with boys.
We’ve taught girls to protect themselves and understand what is and isn’t acceptable but have not been proactive in bringing boys into the fold to make them understand what they see on screen or online is not normal.
Porn is not real life and the age of exposure to it is getting lower and lower.
Free-for-all
There has been too much procrastination about sex education and its timing, form and approach.
So much so, that the kids have left us behind and teach themselves.
We’ve also been asleep at the wheel as online platforms have made it a free-for-all, regardless of age.
I fear we’ve left it too late but I’m hoping the latest report is a serious wake-up call to parents, who need to have conversations with their children, to the Government, who have a chance to make significant changes to the Online Safety Bill, and to schools, who need to invest more in co-ed lessons about sex and relationships.
But perhaps, most of all, to the social media platforms, who have become the pimps.
I don’t care much for those who disapprove of sex and relationship education.
It’s more important than ever.
Besides, I’ve not come here to make friends.
PSYCHO TOM SO DISHY
EVERY once in a blue moon, along comes a TV series that grabs you by the short and curlies.
Happy Valley has been that for me and tomorrow night sees the conclusion of this brilliant drama by Sally Wainwright.
Sarah Lancashire (as Catherine Cawood) is breathtaking, as always.
But, of course, it’s James Norton, depicting psychopath, Tommy Lee Royce, that has had us all captivated.
Doubtless we’re seduced by his good looks and beguiled by his confidence but fundamentally the man is a psychopath.
According to a criminologist one in 100 people are psychopaths (nine out of ten are male) and it’s terrifyingly easy to be so seduced by people with risk-taking personalities.
We’re blinded by the ease with which they say and do outlandish, dangerous things.
They aren’t capable of feeling emotion in the way the rest of us do.
So, the red flags are there but somehow, blinded by good looks, charm and excitement, they starts to fade to a more acceptable pink.
Tommy Lee has been dubbed the “sexiest ever psychopath” by many on social media – making it all the more easy to forget the evil that drives him.
A number of endings were shot so there would be no leaked spoilers, and my mind has been going nuts with the various scenarios I envisage for Royce to meet a truly bitter end.
But in my heart of hearts I know I’ll miss this menacing character.
Strange what attraction does to you . . . then I wonder why I’m having an unsuccessful dating life.
EMILY’S SPOT ON TO REFUSE TO BE SILENCED BY PERVERTS
I WATCHED Emily Atack’s documentary Asking For It? with empathy and interest.
She’s a strong, confident, talented woman and yet has found herself worn down by sustained, inappropriate sexual comments, sexism, threats and degradation on social media.
Men send her filthy messages and vile sexual images of themselves – all unsolicited.
She’s not the only woman who has experienced this, of course, but it takes courage to shine a light on this online abuse.
As women we are told to just switch off our phone and ignore it.
But we shouldn’t have to do that.
Once again, the onus is on the woman changing her behaviour because a man is incapable of being decent.
As a blonde young woman with big breasts and of Swedish heritage, I received a lot of the wrong kind of attention through my teens and twenties.
Probably my thirties and forties, too, on reflection.
I just took it on the chin.
Like Emily, I probably held myself responsible in some warped way – was it the size of my boobs, my make-up?
Nowadays, it’s hard for women to ignore it because it’s on our phones.
I’m glad Emily made the documentary.
We should not be silenced simply because men presume we are easy targets.
Or because they send unsolicited messages and pics simply because they can.