Episode 6 Sunday Morning Live

of Syrians fleeing the conflict on their streets is a massive

humanitarian crisis. Neighbouring countries may not be able to help to

cope the continued influx of people. So other countries may have to help.

Britain may be asked to take in refugees. But should we? Would it be

Welcome to Sunday Morning Live. Also on the show: More than 14 million

people classed themselves as having no faith. Bobby Friction believes

organised religion is to blame. Religions are becoming self-serving

institutions. They have inward looking leaders. It is about

buildings and books that have no longer any relevance.

And as supermarkets ask lads' mags to cover up, a Page three model says

wife -- watches sets -- what she thinks.

My guests are the Reverend Sally Hitchiner, who is an Anglican priest

and chaplain at Brunel University. She also runs an AA meeting,

Agnostics Anonymous. Bobby Friction, from the BBC Asian

Network, describes himself as a music obsessive and worldwide

troublemaker. And Tim Stanley, journalist and leader writer with

the Daily Telegraph, who also has his own Internet opinion blog.

Welcome to you all. We want to know, of course, will what you think. If

you have a webcam com you can join you have a webcam com you can join

us to Skype. You can also give your in Syria during the current conflict

is now more than 100,000. That is a shocking enough statistics. But the

fatality toll has been accompanied by what is estimated to be the

displacement of around 2 million others. Many of them are fleeing to

neighbouring countries. Germany has already offered to take in 5000

refugees if need be. The UN says that if the situation worsens, it

may ask other European countries, including Britain, to take in their

share. The fighting in Syria is driving

6000 Syrians from their homes every day, according to the UN. Many of

them are crossing the border and setting up home in refugee camps in

Turkey Jordan, Lebanon Egypt and Iraq.

Ten or 11 people in a tent for four. I don't know how they cope. If the

UN asks Britain to help take in refugees, that is likely to raise

concerns here at a time when the government is tightening up on

immigration. Hello, my love.

Christine Gilmore is at the sharp end of that debate. She is British

and has kept her maiden name but she is married to Zeead, a Syrian

national she met while studying in Damascus.

I met him through work, through business. We just hit it off

straightaway. Christine decided to leave Syria

because of the troubles. She now lives in Leeds. Her husband is still

in Damascus will stop so far, she has not been granted a Visa to join

her in Britain. We have already been waiting three

years to be together. Three years of my life where I feel in limbo. They

will not let him in. I can't go to Syria, either. Her only contact with

Zeead is by WebCam. Or, more often, on an unreliable

phone line. I know, it is dangerous. I need you so much. I know.

Alongside her own problems and being reunited with Zeead, Christina is

concerned about the thousands of other Syrians who face a bleak

future. A quarter of the entire Syrian

population is this place. They are living in caves, under trees. They

are living in parks. I have seen them with my own eyes. They have

nothing. They are not receiving aid. I think it is shameful. At the

moment, Christine is primarily focused on her own personal

situation. Please be careful. I want you just

to be careful. Look after yourself. That is one individual story. There

are thousands of others looking for refuge. The government says there

are no plans to invite them here. But is it right, Tim Stanley?

all. We have a moral responsibility to do something. We should focus

cash on places like Lebanon on to make sure there is good careful

refugees there. When Britain acts like an imperial power, when it

picked a side in a Civil War to offer moral support to one side, and

when the side loses and things turned difficult, we have a

responsibility because we are involved to stand up and take

people. That happened in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan. It should

happen in the case of Syria. This is the consequence of us pushing people

around and getting involved. That is the question for our text

vote. Should Britain take in will be announced at the end of the

show. Bobby Friction. Moral

responsibility? I am very proud of Britain's

leadership when it comes to refugees over the last 100 years. At any

other point, I think I would have completely, 100% said water and

asked taking in those refugees. I do feel that we are at a unique point

in history, British history, European history. -- 100% supportive

of taking in those refugees. We have what is happening in the Middle

East. This is not just a Civil War in Syria. It is what is happening

throughout the Middle East, which is an ideological struggle which soon

could spread across the Middle East. This time, before we start to let in

refugees, we to focus on surrounding countries. Maybe not Lebanon, where

a quarter of the population are refugees. We need to focus on places

like Turkey and do our good deeds but do it through money and

leadership. Sally, let's take the first of these points. Are people

right to fear the social consequences in Britain if we bring

in Syrian refugees? Are you implying that there might be extremists among

the refugees that we take in? is one fear. Indeed, there are so

proclaimed jihad -ists now among the Syrian opposition. There is a great

deal of disquiet about what the effect might be of bringing in who

knows whom. We need to be careful on who we bring in. But we are already

involved. Tim was saying we can't risk getting partially involved

because we have to pick up the pieces. The UK government already

funds rebels in non-lethal equipment. We are already involved

in this complex. There is so much humanitarian need. Thousands have

died. The experience of Syrians I have met is that they are just

deeply in distress. Three quarters of the refugees are women and

children. We need to play a part in looking after them. We are already

involved. We can still be involved through the UN and working with

partners, especially Turkey. Our We don't have to bring all of the

refugees in. I am not sitting here and say we should have a closed-door

policy. At the moment, refugees, they come into areas that are black,

Asian and Kosovan, and all of the recent waves of immigration we have

had. The pressure has happens there. Tim, I got the impression from your

opening remarks that you would invite the Syrian refugees in

against your better judgement. Do you have no fears about what the

effects in Britain would be? They're always fears, Fiat in terms of on

public services, fear of who you are taking in. Another group we should

be compassionate for is Syrian Christians. They are picked on by

both sides. When it comes to humanitarian crisis, you have to

take a leap of faith. That is the faith in other people, the faith

that this is the best you can do for people who are truly in need. In

that case, I think that is the judgement we have to make. We have

to make the judgement because we chose to be involved. When you

choose to be involved in that way, you have to take responsibility for

the consequences. There are a lot of people in this country who are

already radicalised will stop there were problems before any Syrians

arrive. The idea that a wave of refugees caused the problem is

misleading. There are already home-grown problems. Let me bring in

the Lim rather -- let me bring in a visitor. Where were you and what did

you see out there? I have just come back on Thursday night. It was my

third trip since the beginning of the year. I witnessed a number of

disasters in my time. I will just give you an idea of one particular

tented village, if I can call it that. This village is inside the

border. The village I got to come and when I say the word village, I

used the word loosely. 190 families have travelled 150 kilometres. They

arrived 20 days ago. I asked where they had been living before this,

and they said they had been living in caves. Think about this. They had

no tents. They are living with sheets over their heads, under olive

trees. They haven't had a hot meal for they can't remember how long. We

went there to do a food distribution in the next day. We distributed

16,000 food parcels in Ramadan. When we gave the food out, the first

thing I saw the families do is to share it with those who arrived the

night before. That food is not going to go far. The sanitation, the water

hygiene is deplorable. The other thing I want people to take note of

when they take part in your vote is the medical issues. The number of

young girls who have had their legs blown off, women who have had arms

blown off, they have been targeted by the regime. Hold fire just a

moment. I want to ask the friction for his comments on that. They are

filled to bursting point. Do we not need to do our bit? I would like to

ask Na'eem Raza a question. You have spoken to these refugees. It is a

heartbreaking story. We are all affected by it. But these guys don't

want to come to the UK, do they? They want food, basic essentials.

I don't think anybody wants to leave their home country. The issue is

that we have to take some kind of steps. When I took of medical

issues, there are some extreme cases before the war, people with medical

issues, and nobody is working inside the country. These people are left

on their own. People requested medication everywhere. I wanted to

take a doctor across the border to treat an issue. There are hardly

these issues. There is nothing in the country for them. We have to

come in to the country and Paul be people out. Thank you for giving us

such a graphic picture of what the campus are like. Can I ask now to

talk to the Reverend Nadim Nassar on the WebCam. He's the founder of a

foundation and is the first Syrian Anglican priest in Britain. You have

heard that moving condition of the refugees. Do you think Britain

should be bringing them in? Good morning. There is no bright or

lovely situation for any refugees. Refugees mean, by their nature, that

it is a tragedy. I want to ask the government what is the incentive,

what is behind the idea of bringing refugees to this country? And how

many? Germany is offering to bring 5000 people. Tell me something. 5000

people out of 6 million? How much would be a solution to the problem?

I think the problem is not how many people we bring here to Britain or

to Germany or other countries. The question is, how do we solve the

problem. It is a gesture only. That is the point I was going to put to

you. Let me ask you, tokenism is what the Reverend was saying.

think he makes a very good point. It is important this conflict ends as

quickly as possible and we enable Syria and its inhabitants to get

back to a normal life, but it is not a safe plays right now, and it is

not possible for people to maintain a safe existence. They are fleeing

to neighbouring countries that are less equipped to deal with them than

we are, so I think we need to play our part in not just pumping aid

into Syria but actually providing safe outlets for people to take

refuge before they turn back to There are two scary double standards

here. First of all, in this country, we are all in favour of economic

immigration. Bog area and remain you will have access to the labour

market, and we don't mind that. -- old area and Romania. The second

double standard is that I suspect that when it comes to talking about

refugees from largely Islamic countries, people express more

concern and more worried than they would if they were talking about

countries from Christian countries. There is a very worrying attitude

toward Syria and the nature of asylum seekers that betrays a

decline in charitable spirit among some people. We should make it clear

that it is not the British government that is accused of

tokenism or any such thing, it is the UN that is suggesting that they

might, in the course of time, come to Britain. Let's forget the UN,

let's forge ahead. Let's take the money we would have spent taking

these refugees in and work with Turkey. Turkey is not a third World

country. It is easy for us to have compassion fatigue when people are

in a far-away country. If we were a young mum with three kids knocking

on the door, we would want to help them, but the fact that they are far

away means we do not care as much, and even having just a small, capped

number of refugees in the UK would raise our compassion. I care more

about Syria because of the Syrians I have met through my work and through

different situations, and I think they could be vital spokespeople,

who keep us aware of the conflict and stop this from becoming more

horrific than it needs to be. Bobby does not mean it this way, but

sometimes, when people say, let the region deal with its problems, it is

a case of the fairing charity and the charitable response. I think it

overlooks the fact that it is our problem and we have fuelled this

crisis by our actions. I mentioned Turkey because let's look at 11 and

- a quarter of the country are now refugees, the same sectarian issues

that are driving Syria are also there in Lebanon. It is not as

pushing them. How much compassion fatigue, do you think, is going on

in this country? The Disasters Emergency Committee say they have

only raised �17 million for Syrian aid so far compared to, for

instance, 107 million for the Haiti earthquake. I think it is really

important, the point you raised, and it breaks my heart to think that we

are less compassionate as a nation to muzzle the Geordie countries.

That is evil, that is wrong. -- two Muslim majority countries. It is

really important to know that we are secure in our cultural identity,

that refugees are a gift to our nation and have made us who we are,

and it is really important to push people were there seems to be a

disparity between wanting immigrants from countries that look like us and

maybe sound like us, I don't know who that is, because Britain is so

multicultural these days. Where does this go in the end? I am the son of

an immigrant, I understand these issues, I love this country, I'm not

saying, let's close the door, but it is a complex situation. It is not

just Syria, we know what is happening in the Middle East. It is

not compassion fatigue and Islam phobia. It is the fact that we are

living in austerity Britain, it is getting hard-core within the inner

cities, it is getting really hard. We love people, we love refugees,

but what we are looking at now is not a natural disaster. It is not

Haiti, it is not a tsunami. It is a local civil war which could

eventually be the 21st century of the Spanish civil war, the beginning

of a much wider conflict. I do not think it is about being

anti-immigrant or refugee. Let's hear what some of our viewers as

saying. Barry says we must help them as much as we can but that is not

the same as giving them all a home. Ciaran says we have confused asylum

with economic migration. Of course, we should offer shelter to those in

need. And Derek in Manchester says we have enough migrants as it is,

Britain cannot afford to provide housing and an income for Syrian

refugees, too. That was Derek and Manchester. Do keep your comments

coming in. Our poll is still open, and the question is, should Britain

take in Syrian refugees? You can Attendances at most Christian

churches in Britain have been dropping for decades. In the last

national census, more than 40 million people classed themselves as

having no religion. There has been a growth in non-Christian religions,

most marked in Islam is the country's cultural and ethnic

profile changes. In a recent survey by you go, there were suggestions

that 41% of all young people agreed with the statement, religion is more

often the cause of evil in the world. Broadcaster Bobby Friction

believes structured religion is no longer relevant and the future is

about personal spirituality, not This building used to be a church.

It is where the locals would come and get their moral guidance every

Sunday, or at least that is are mantic view of the past. The truth

is attendance was a tradition, not a religious choice. That is why

numbers have declined so much over the decades. This is a living

example of the decline of institutionalised religion. This is

now a Pakistani restaurant. The Jews have been replaced by dining tables.

Some of you might get sentimental about that, but why? It is just

bricks and water. God does not physically reside here. Like he does

not reside in other religious religion, but I'm not an atheist. I

do believe in the concept of God, I just don't want any man-made,

organised religion telling me institutions with, apart from a few

exceptions, inward looking leaders. It is all about buildings and books

that no longer have relevance that our work, our experiences, in mother

nature or the universe. Let's find God in music and art and travel, and

within ourselves. What we don't need is to find faith in organised

religion, so let's drop the facade, embrace this change, and let our own

personal beliefs be our guide to life in the future. Bobby Friction.

Do you agree with him or disagree? Do organised religions provide a

framework for our lives? Or would you prefer to find God on your own

terms? You can join in the debate by webcam or make your point by phone,

text, e-mail or online. So, Sally, has Bobby got a point? And isn't it

the case, couldn't it be argued that organised religions encourage people

to follow a herd rather than think for themselves? I can't really speak

for all organised religions, but definitely for my own faith,

thinking of yourself is vitally important to understanding

Christianity and reading the Bible. We encourage people to form their

own opinions, and I would encourage people to engage with the issues for

themselves, engage with the person of Christ as you read the Gospels

for yourself, and come to conclusions based on that. But it is

important to think, what are the alternatives? We form our views by

our guts and what we feel is right, which can lead us in all sorts of

crazy directions, or we form our views by the good of what society

teaches us, which actually we have seen, in history, has been a

problem. Is that not a good point? If you junk tradition altogether,

you are joking and accumulated body of wisdom, of guidance and thought

that people have drawn on for centuries, what is not about as now?

I think we are genuinely, is a mass, human population, smarter than

we used to be. Really?Yes! I totally believe this. We are not

living in agrarian communities. We have contact with every other type

of person, every other idea, everything is available to us. You

were just about to make a point about non-religion causing a lot of

hurt. Two me, I assume you were going to use the old Nazi argument,

that atheism, well, they were not really atheists, the atheists of the

commonest block and everything. Two me, what religions are our super and

you did groups like political ideologies. I almost feel like some

allegiance these days be like political parties. I was not going

to is a full and we outgrown religion? To take the point that

Bobby was beginning to develop, has the internet killed organised

religion? We may end up focusing on Facebook photos of holidays and

hard-core porn. Thank goodness we live in such a smart age with people

like Bobby around. He is the Saint Augustin of the 21st century. God is

not about therapy, God is not about feeling good about yourself or a

framework for the like. God is about truth, seating and try to find

truth, and sometimes the truth is scary and asks you to do difficult

things. Second, religion is like any kind of pass - it requires learning

and discipline. As a musician to simply compose a symphony without

any kind of training or structure, without an orchestra, with an

orchestra, and he will compose noise. The same is the case with

religion. Without organised religion, if you say, make up your

own mind, they will come up with one or two things, dream catchers and

crappy therapeutic stuff that has no real meaning or substance, or even

worse, extremism. They will make decisions which are very bad. What

Bobby is describing is how you end up with lots of people with shower

caps on their heads drinking poisoned Jews in order to get onto a

comment and fly away to meet God in the stratosphere. -- poisoned juice.

Is it not a problem when you see different religions claiming the

monopoly on truth? What is wrong with that? Is it not possible that

one of the religions is wrong and the other is right? Why do feel that

everyone has to be right? There is a truth beyond us, beyond you and me,

and we are all arguing over what that truth is, and that struggle has

defined supplies Asian and created art and beauty and society and

everything. -- has defined civilisation. I understand what

religion has given people over the ages, what it has given

civilisation. Maybe as the human race, as human beings, we would not

be as advanced as we are if it were not for the coalescent aspects of

religion, but we are reaching a time where, the argument that there is

only one truth, and I do not care if you are a tribesman in Papua New

Guinea who is never met anyone, or someone living in Scotland, someone

living at the North Pole, you must follow this truth to reach heaven.

We are going to have some different views now, I want to speak to the

co-founder of the Apostasy Project, and they help, if I am right in

saying, people to leave religious affiliations if they are finding it

difficult to do so. Why are you so keen to get people out of religion?

It is not that I am keen to get people out of religion. I just want

to ensure that everybody has the freedom to follow the way of life

that they feel most comfortable with. The unfortunate situation is,

when you talk about religion, particularly young people's

religion, you are talking about the religion that was thrust upon them

by their parents and their community, and a lot of people in

this day and age are not comfortable with these identities and these

belief systems that they are supposed to adopt because they have

been told to. I think, any modern age, with human rights and things

like that, people should have the right to choose, as I think Bobby is

saying. Let's take a different view on that from Abdelwahab, who used to

be known as UK Apache, when you were in the music business. You gave up

music altogether in order to be able to practice your faith, the exact

opposite from the last caller. Why? I would not say I gave up music

directly. I would say that my spiritual journey I still perform

the same way. I still use my vocal talents. But I don't perform in

clubs. I think it goes hand-in-hand with my face. What do you think of

what a long shot half had to say about people who have been brought

up with what he would say is the construction of religion? -- Alom

Shaha. We live in England, a society where

you have the choice to choose. Nothing has to be forced upon you.

Even in Islamic religion, there is no compulsion. Even if you are

influenced by your parents, and you are going to be influenced with what

you are up what up with, when you become to a certain age, you can

choose what you want to follow, whether you want to be a Christian,

a Hindu, an atheist... Sorry to interrupt you. I'm keen to get from

you why it is that you have chosen what you have from a very

independent and clearly intelligent point of view, what have you chosen

and why? I have chosen is lamb. mother passed away about three years

ago. She never force religion upon me. She said it was up to me to

choose. I looked at many religions. Eventually, I found the truth in

Islam. That is what I related to. Everybody has a choice. For me, the

morals of Islam connected with me. In seeking the truth, like your

panel said... I want to speak to Abdullah. I know

him as UK Apache. We used to tour together. It is great going on about

choice. I am not an atheist at all. You go on about the choice of

accepting Islam, Church of bringing, Catholicism and... Out of

interest, what are your thoughts on leaving a religion? Is it fair that

a young guy can leave Islam if he wants to? If he wants to. We live in

England, we have to follow the laws of the country. The law of the

country is that people are free to make choices.

Compare the spirit of the last two speakers. There is this language of

love. It is fantastic. What does the first guy mean about brainwashing?

When a kid goes to church, what kind of brainwashing is that? It is not

brainwashing. There is so much paranoia about religion in this

country. I am a Roman Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church is the world

's biggest non-governmental provider of help for people with AIDS.

For the church of England, it is far from brainwashing. The biggest

growth in Christianity is evangelical churches. It suggests

that people are looking for certainty and not, for giving, the

wishy-washy anything goes that is associated with the church of

England. Evangelical courses promote the idea

that you look into the issues yourself, that you explore what is

truth and what do the claims of each religion have to say. Unlike my

friend Bobby here, he's sitting on the fence as a permanent agnostic,

but have you looked into the issues? Have you thought that an

idea could be true? I'm going to leave that response, Bobby.

I want to ask what you made of the comments about brainwashing? I am

disappointed because I didn't mention brainwashing at all.

point is that in the modern world, ancient religions seem anachronistic

to a lot of people. As Bobby said, we have lots of new knowledge. There

are other ways of making sense of the world outside of religion.

People should have the freedom to choose those ways if they want. I am

about freedom and choice just as much as UK Apache.

This could go on for ages. I want to get another perspective. Noel

Moules, and the Anabaptist Network, gives us a different take on

organised religion. Yes, I think that there is a real

need to come to the heart of what the Christian faith is concerned

with. We need to look at Jesus -based spirituality. So many

churches in the UK have been brought up in this historic catastrophe of

Christendom, where there is a link between the church and state. People

are moving away from the church in droves. People are looking at the

church and seeing it as irrelevant. I, personally, rejoice in this.

are keen on people getting out of buildings, aren't you? That is

right. It is how the buildings are used. The important thing is

community. For me, it is a Jesus focused spirituality that is

empowering and working to transform society. I think there are all sorts

of possibilities there for us to explore. I actually think we are

living in the most exciting time to be a Christian in 2000 years. Sally

Hitchiner? I do agree, to an extent. Religion

in general is about relationships, a relationship with God, with other

people who are gathering to worship God. Just as we are a family, a

family needs a home. The church buildings are often the most public

the recognised and owned aspect of the church, so it is a tragedy that

we are known for our buildings... But it is true. One in six people go

to visit a cathedral every year. People love their own church

buildings. It is important that we make the most of that. We should all

be together focusing on the church serving the community. Bobby, I'm

going to break your heart because you can't get in here. There is so

much to talk about. This is so great. OK, another time. Thank you.

You have been voting in our text poll this morning. Should Britain

take insulin refugees? The lines are Co-operative stores have given lads'

mags five weeks to cover up their front pages with sealed bags or be

taken off the shelves. Tesco have not happened up their policy, two,

persuading three lads' mags to adapt their front pages to become more

modest. They have restricted sales of such magazines to over 18s/ --

over 18s. The managing director of Twitter in the UK has said the

company is hiring extra staff to guard against abusive tweets against

women. He has apologised for recent attacks on the social media that

have included threat of bomb attacks and rape directed at women. But just

hours after his announcement, the classicist and TV presenter Mary

Beard, who has faced abuse before, and not she had been sent a bomb

threat through a tweet. So, the revealing photographs and lads' mags

stoked up sexism? We will discuss that in a moment. First, the views

of two people who believe there is This photographer makes part of his

living from glamour shots. He feels this sort of revealing photos that

appear in so-called lads' mags and tabloid newspapers do not portray a

negative image of women. The majority of people I find can

appreciate it without degrading the person they are looking at.

The supermarkets' get tough policy is misguided, according to Nathan.

He believes it could do more harm than good.

It will become something that is seedy, that we don't talk about.

That is never a healthy way of having a discussion between adults.

That is what we are talking about. Kids should not be looking at it. On

the other side, Lucy Collette also takes issue with the critics.

don't think it exploits women at all. Nobody has put a gun to my

head. That is a view held by others in the business. Nathan argues there

is a fine line between the sort of pictures that appear in other glossy

fashion magazines and lads' mags. I looked at some covers earlier.

was a handful of women in swimwear. If somebody being in a swimsuit now

deemed offensive? -- is somebody. Then how do you treat other

magazines where somebody has flesh on show? If lads' mags get banned,

what is next? Are we going to have to start not to show our ankles? We

are regressing to the dark ages. There are a lot of other important

issues in the world to be addressing, not just the fact that

women, who are equal that our equal right to do what we want to do is

taken away. Nathan thinks it is up to the parents to regulate what

their children see. If it is the content, I would argue

you can't see the content until you look through it. If you are worried

about kids, don't let your kids rifle through magazines in the

supermarket on your own. Nathan there with his views. Should

lads' mags be forced to cover up or are they seem to matter got wider

problems in society? Or is cracking down actually taking away women 's

equal rights? What do you think? You can join in by webcam or make your

point by phone, text, e-mail or online. Let's hear the views of our

guests. Bobby, what is wrong with them? It seems like a black and

white issue. It is not, it is complex. On one side, you have got

the history of feminism, who are four equality for women. Sadly, when

you get equality, it also means young ladies can go out and say,

well, I am going to/whatever to make money as I feel empowered, as well

as feminists saying, I have equality of pay. You have got that side of

the argument, which is essentially feminism isn't just about shutting

down stuff. The other side is also what you mention about parents. I

don't think these magazines are changing the way youths and boys and

men view women. I believe it is about parents being able to bring up

their kids with a very free and beautiful view of sexuality. They

are out of sight input -- in supermarkets. I have no problem with

that. It is an economic argument. If Tesco wants to do that, let them go

ahead. It is their shop. A relic of the past? I was amused by the guy

who said if you put a bag over the magazines, they will be seeded.

think they are seedy already. There is different forms of sexuality. To

me, the big issue is the Internet, hard-core pornography, which is

basically vicarious prostitution. That is doing more damage to young

people 's mines, because it is so available. But the suggestion is

that this is a matter of degree. Degree is important. I am worried

that we are starting to say we should either shut down sex or

liberate all sex. It is between authoritarianism and libertarianism.

No, we should have a mature debate. We should make a choice and a

distinction, please come between hard-core, abusive pornography and

something that is just about people having a bit of fun.

People are confused because they feel feminists are against flesh,

against the shortness of the SCUD or showing off your boobs. It is not

about that. It is about models of perfectionism. Women's magazines are

guilty of this as well. It means all of us, women, aren't happy with the

way they look and men aren't happy with the women they share a bed

with. It is important that we show the needs of the Internet industry,

women who are doing it because they need the money. That is what

damaging to a society. It is interesting you bring up the point

about women's magazines? I think that is an issue that Lucy Collett

is also keen to make, because you argue that other magazines can be

more damaging to women than the kind of work that you do. Is that right?

There is an element of damage to women with these magazines, because

they are constantly telling you how to diet, because you might be too

big. I am try to think of my words here! They are constantly picking up

flaws in women, picking out cellulite on a women. Everyone has

got cellulite, everyone gets spots, and it makes the readers feel

inadequate about themselves. I know, for a start, I did when I was

younger, when I was turning into a woman myself. I would see these

images of women and magazines saying, look, she is too fat. So I

thought, crikey, I am not allowed to look like that, so I did extreme

dying thing -- dieting, I used to be a size eight, and now I am a size

12-14, so it seems ridiculous, because this is my natural body. I

want to show my body off because I am happy with it. I want to help

women understand that it is fine to be this size, whereas in gossip

magazines they slate you for it. They tell you it is not okayed to be

this big, or they tell you it is not okayed to be this skinny. It is

mixed messages that they are giving you all the time. Lucy, thank you

very much, a very interesting point. Bobby, I want to put this to you,

have we got the wrong target here? was going to ask a question about

the boys, young men, how young men perceive sexuality. You have talked

about young women and gossip magazines, what do you think about

your breasts and young boys? Honestly, it was not a joke

question. How are you affecting the use of Britain, the male side of it?

The male side of it? Well, it is an appreciation of the female form, it

is instinctive, you are meant to look at someone else being naked,

because it is in your nature. How are we to have children if we do not

know what the other sex looks like? Sexes there, it is in your instincts

do what to do it, no matter how much you cover it up, no matter how much

you deem it bad, it is there, because we are born. The thing I

would like to put due, Lucy, you seem bright and articulate, this is

something you have actively chosen to do, but I used to be a youth

worker, and the thing that struck me micro was that some in your the

girls I was working with, it was their aspiration to be a glamour

girls or a footballer's wife. It is one thing for a small number to

genuinely choose that, but where are the girls that want to be doctors,

lawyers, housewives, all these other variety of things? The choice is

really important, educating young girls that they can choose their

destiny. Just because they are beautiful does not mean they have to

do something like this, their minds are as important as their bodies.

Lucy, thank you for making a point, I do want to bring in Kat Banyard,

who is the founder of UK Feminista, a campaign for gender equality and

part of the campaign to lose the lads' mags. What do you make of this

point that, actually, you are going to the barricades on something that

is just a matter of degree, not as important as what is happening on

the internet, some of the hard-core stuff? And on the other level,

frankly, there is other stuff that demeans women that you are not

making a fuss about? The campaign led by UK Feminista and Object is

not about saying this is the only issue in the world, but lads' mags

play a crucial and unique role, a side rolled to the internet, because

they are placed in everyday spaces, like shops and supermarkets, where

people go to get their food with their children. They play a role in

normalising the idea that it is acceptable to see people as

dehumanised sex objects, and that is what lads' mags are all about. For

ten years, they have done very effective marketing is just a bit of

harmless fun, a bit of banter. But there is extensive research to show

that treating women like sex objects duels sexist attitudes and

behaviours. We accepted it is not okayed to have... Do these lads'

mags teens fuel the kind of sexism we have been seeing on Twitter?

There is a reason that the biggest coalition against violence is

supporting this campaign, and that is because by betraying women as sex

objects, it feels sexist attitudes and behaviours that underpin

violence against on. It is a hugely serious issue, and that is why

thousands of people have been raising boys and have been at the

shocked. Let me bring in Dominic Smith, the editor of Nuts magazine,

one of the magazines that has been asked to cover up by some stores, to

tone down your front covers by others. Do you accept that you are

creating an environment where the kind of abuse that we have been

seeing on Twitter is more likely, is made more permissible among some

segments of the male publishing? absolutely do not. I have to point

out these at two very separate issues that you are merging, the

views on Twitter is terrible and no-one can say it is fine, it is

awful. And then these lads' mags, which are a separate issue.

point has been made that it is not separate and that you are

contributing to an object of occasion of women which makes the

kind of thing that we have seen on Twitter more likely to happen.

not at all. Kat Banyard talked about treating women as dehumanised sex

objects. In our magazine, these women are celebrities. Lucy Collett

is a personality, we interview her. These are not just visual images,

they have a rounded personality in the magazine. The daily review of

2007 pointed out there is no causal link between images and lads' mags

and harm to young people, it is in the report, I would urge her to go

and look at that report. I wonder if some of this debate is framed by

class. Because I think quite often there is a certain snobbery towards

women who choose that particular kind of profession, which is very

unfair, because not everybody wants to be a doctor or a lawyer. Some

people want to be a footballer's wife, and there is a judgment made

about that. I'm not sure this debate is entirely about the subject, and

we talk about it entirely in terms of feminism. Men are object divide,

too, men are on the front cover of magazines. This is about the

commercialisation of the body and rampant materialism. I am worried

that it is one group of women saying to another group, you are not being

what a modern woman should be. one thing to say that at about an

individual. When a class of girls all wants to be a footballer's wife,

then you begin to think, maybe we are and Doctor making these girls

not to reach their potential. Not everybody has the gift to be a

doctor or a lawyer, but when there is not diversity, and there are a

disproportionate number of girls from rougher areas who wants to be

in these professions, we should ask what we are doing to them as a

society. Isn't that about parenting in 2013? We cannot just wash our

hands of its because they are not our kids. I do not know if you have

daughters, but it is important that parents take an active role. As a

society, we need to take responsibility and be role models

and empower young girls to see their potential and make active choices.

agree with that. I just want to emphasise again that I think this

debate about Twitter is not entirely about misogyny and feminism. It is

about how we treat each other as individuals. I know the nature of

some of the threads are very highly sexualised and about femininity, but

I get calls about unpleasant things and threatened all the time, and I

am not a woman. You do not have the same standards of perfectionism pump

that you all the time. There are men who are anorexic, there are trends

that are coming out in masculinity as well but are not allowing

diversity and freedom of expression, but it is primarily focused on

women. That is partly because we live in a world where the mind is

undervalued and the physical is seen more important. But why does that

apply more to women? Not at all, I think men are under certain

pressures, you know, talking on a personal level, I do not like sport,

and I'd be locked out of male society. We are under pressure as

well, coming towards the end of the programme, and I want to let you

know what viewers have been saying. This anonymous comment, it is up to

parents to regulate what their children see, not the government.

Should magazines that have topless men on the cover be obscured as

well? And this can only be a positive step in altering the public

mindset that women exist mainly for men's gratification. The last words

to you, thank you very much for your comments are not. We have to end it

there. The results are in of the poll, we asked whether Britain

should take in Syrian refugees, and this is what you told us. 13% except

yes, and 87% said no. All the good people at church, that is the

problem! That is where I should be, too! Exactly, we are not at church.

, I am sorry about that, viewers. will try to drag Bobby with us as

well! It is a hefty majority, isn't it? For you who felt that we need to

show compassion. We do, and I think compassion is... Things that promote

compassion, for example, church, are incredibly useful analysis ID,

important voices that listen to us when we are feeling this financial

squeeze. It is a hefty majority for people who do not want refugees

necessarily coming in now, but not necessarily a majority of people

washing their hands of them. disagree, I think an instinctive

response is yes, it is sad we did not get that. I understand these are

troubled times, and people are worried about their services, their

own communities. Nonetheless, when someone knocks on your door, when a

stranger comes, you should let them in, that is what we should do as

human beings. Bobby? I agree, and if they come knocking at the door, we

have a chance to help our other neighbours, into injunction with our

other neighbours, to look after them. So they can look after

themselves down the street! It is important we look after ourselves as

a society and we do not close our ears to others because they are on

the other side of the world. Thank you very much indeed, thanks to

everyone who is taken part today, also to my guests in the studio,

reverend Sally Hitchiner, Tim Stanley and Bobby Friction. Do not

text or call the phone lines anymore, they are now closed, but

you can continue the conversation online. The links are on the

website. That is it for this week. Thanks for watching and for all your