Double standards?

[bibblebub]

Today's Times has a goofy looking woman, 43yo, tattooed, pregnant by her 19yo boyfriend (so not married) on the front page of the main paper, and the front page of the magazine as well as a 5 page article inside.

But she's an artist, so that's alright. If she was just some woman from an run-down housing estate would News International fete her or use her as an example of broken Britain?

[Coobeastie]

She was married for 11 years. She can support herself so why shouldn't she choose to have children at 43...if it makes you happier she is also engaged to her boyfriend.

Its hardly an example of broken Britain and the paper is following the story as her partner is in an up and coming actor and she is a famous artist/ bafta nominated director.

[boxtops]

Agree, this isn't broken Britain, it's a bit of advertising for the couple. Plenty of older women have younger other halves these days!

[B00]

I also highly doubt that this woman will be happily sat on her backside swilling White Lightening, whilst our tax money enters into her bank account.

[chrissa1]

That's you told bibble!

[bibblebub]

well, you throw a bone and see what the cat drags in

[lardhelmet]

Hi boxy - how are you? Have you been on your holidays?

[saxy_jag]

I think Bibble's right, though. If this wasn't a famous couple, but just an ordinary couple from a council estate - whatever their standards - the tabloids would be down on them like a ton of bricks.

There's nothing wrong with Ms Taylor-Wood's and Mr Johnson's relationship at all, and there should be nothing wrong with any similar relationship among us lesser mortals.

[bibblebub]

Look you, you've just spoiled the tone of the replies by agreeing with me. Make sure you don't do it again in future.

[lynbrown]

I thought The Times has a cheek to use the same big photo twice. I dont want to read the articles twice, so why should I pay to look at the same photo twice? I also thought it was a bit yucky.