I just went to my local shop, to find it had displays of Mini Eggs and Cadbury's Creme Eggs.
Happy Easter, folks!
Space v. Time in the grammar of emojis
9 minutes ago
About me? Mad, disabled, in debt, feminist, radical, angry, pacifist, warrior, radio 4 listener, geek, flower-power chick... About Hippie blog? Ramblings, photos, fury, giggles and musings about love, peace, friendship, madness, happiness, the state of the world, my life, cool pics, my health and general ranting...
Jodie Foster comes out - at last!
Congratulations, Jodie. But why did it take so long to confirm what we already knew?
It's standard practice for Hollywood stars to thank friends and family when accepting awards. But when Jodie Foster paid tribute to "my beautiful Cydney" during a speech at the Hollywood Reporter's Women in Entertainment breakfast last week, it caused a ripple of excitement.
So now we know. Jodie Foster's partner of at least 15 years is a woman. Just like Jodie. That's right, folks: Jodie Foster is a lesbian. This startling piece of news is akin to the shock revelation that Rudolph the Reindeer has a very shiny nose. In other words, if you didn't already know this, you seriously need to retune your gaydar.
It's a secret as open as the Grand Canyon that Foster has been stepping out with film producer Cydney Bernard for years, and that they are raising Foster's two children together. The surprise is not that Jodie is gay, but that it has taken her so long to say so.
Famously protective of her privacy, Foster has long resisted calls from gay rights advocates to become an out-and-proud role model. Lesbians across the land have long been divided by the Jodie question. Her willingness to take on gutsy, serious, even feminist roles is admired, while her coyness about her sexuality has been met with disappointment. After all, we don't have many role models, and a trip down the red carpet hand in hand with Cydney would have done a lot to raise lesbian visability.
There's a widely held view that being gay is bad for a celebrity career: Ellen DeGeneres - who had a TV series cancelled shortly after both she and her character came out - is a case in point. But surely someone with the prestige and power of Jodie Foster could challenge the squeamishness about homosexuality that still prevails in America.
Perhaps, though, we should cut Jodie some slack. I don't recall Nicole Kidman, say, having to "announce" her heterosexuality. The fact that the grand gesture of "coming out" is still a big deal just shows that most straight people still assume everybody else is heterosexual. The advantage for Jodie is that she only has to come out once. Non-celebrity lesbians and gay men have to do it every time they meet someone new.
Are you a woman over 60 who doesn't get a state pension?
Are you a woman over 60 who doesn’t get a state pension? Get £1000s back
What's this about?
A parliamentary question by a Lib Dem MP has shown that many women in their 60s are unnecessarily missing out on the state pension. To get a pension you need to have paid national insurance for 10 years of your working life; around 750,000 women are believed to be very near, but just under, this threshold.
By offering to pay a few £100, if you're near the threshold you can start to get the basic pension of £87 a week, and get a backdated payout from your 60th birthday, which is likely to be £1000s.
The reason I write 'offering' is actually you won't need to pay them money - it can just be taken from your payout. E.g you need to pay £340 of National Insurance to get your entitlement; and then you're owed £2000 back pay. The £340 then just comes out of the back pay.
Who's affected?
Women most likely to be affected are those that have paid some national insurance contributions but may have taken a break to have children, and not quite met the 10 year contribution quota to get a pension. But if you're a woman over 60 and aren't withdrawing a state pension, check now.
How to check
The quickest way to check is to call the National Insurance Deficiency Helpline on 0845 915 5996.
Explain your situation and ask how far off the required national insurance contributions you are to get a pension. You won't actually need to part with any money; the top-up contributions will simply be deducted from the backdated pension you are owed.
What you need to find out is
A. How much more national insurance must I pay to get a pension?
B. How much will the pension be each week?
C. How much will I get backdated?
Assuming the benefit of B and C outweigh A.... go for it!
Will I lose benefits elsewhere if I draw a pension?
Drawing a pension may affect other means-tested benefits, but this differs case by case. The best thing to do is follow the steps above to check whether you may be eligible and if it's worth it.
Also if you are married, have a husband more than 5 years older than you and are drawing a pension on his contributions you're unlikely to benefit.
More information
This was first reported on BBC Radio 4 by the Moneybox team... if you're looking at this it's well worth reading the article and listening to the audio.
Read the BBC article: Pension Boost For Older Women
Listen to Radio 4: MoneyBox Item on this pension boost
By Robert Verkaik, Law Editor
Published: 08 October 2007
An important part of the Government's immigration policy has suffered a serious blow after a leading airline announced it would no longer carry failed asylum-seekers who were being forcibly removed from the United Kingdom.
XL Airways, which has a fleet of 24 aircraft, said it was opposed to the policy because it had "sympathy for all dispossessed people in the world".
Last week, The Independent revealed that hundreds of failed asylum-seekers have claimed they have suffered physical and racial abuse during the removal process at the hands of private security guards.
The Government relies on airlines using chartered and scheduled aircraft to deport asylum-seekers who have failed to win a right to remain in the UK.
In an email to a campaign group which supports failed asylum seekers, XL said its chief executive had told the Government it had not "fully understood" the political dimensions of these flights. In February, one of its aircraft was used to deport 40 failed asylum-seekers to the Democratic Republic of Congo as part of the Government's "operation castor".
Now it has emerged that the airline has written to the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns confirming its decision to pull out of any further flights. The XL email, sent on 12 September, said: "We had a contract with the Government along with other carriers, for a range of flying. Under this contract we operated one flight in February to DR Congo as part of this contract, without full understanding of the political dimensions involved.
"Our chief executive [Phillip Wyatt] had made it quite clear to all concerned that we will not be operating any further flights of this nature ... We are not neutral on the issue and have sympathy for all dispossessed persons in the world, hence our stance."
A spokesman for the airline told The Independent the Government had been informed of its decision. Other airlines are now expected to make their own objections public.
It is not known how many airlines have contracted to carry failed asylum-seekers but it is estimated that the Government pays out several million pounds each year. Emma Ginn, of the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns, said last night: "It's time airlines rethink what they are doing. Shareholders and customers will be horrified by the reality of what happens to deportees taken for these flights."
The Borders and Immigration Agency, the government body that has responsibility for forced removals, has refused to disclose details, requested under the Freedom of Information Act, about deportation flights. The agency said: "If we were to disclose the information you have requested, this would prejudice the number of airlines willing to contract with the agency on charter operations and could drive up the cost of such operations. In addition, the release of information could damage commercially those airlines who offer this service."
British Airways and Virgin, who were contacted by The Independent, said their aircraft had been used for the purposes of escorted deportations as they were under a legal obligation to return failed asylum-seekers. A Virgin spokesperson said: "That is a matter for the Home Office, who makes immigration policy. We are simply not qualified to make those decisions."
British Airways refused to say how many removals it carried out each year, but said it adopted a policy of permitting one escorted or two unescorted removals per flight : "It is UK law and we comply with it – it's like asking whether we are happy paying income tax."
But a Home Office spokesman said the Borders and Immigration Agency only contracted with airlines willing to operate removal flights. He added: "The agency uses agents/brokers to arrange both charter and scheduled removals. Airline captains have the right to refuse carriage of a passenger