I can't find a graphic of it on the net, but I was rather surprised to see Transport for London's Cabwise campaign has opted for a rather distressing image in its latest poster.

If you're not in London, Cabwise promotes the use of licensed minicabs and taxis, and warns about the dangers of unlicensed transport. And the latest campaign is illustrated with a picture of a frightened, weeping woman begging her attacker - presumably the driver of an unlicensed cab - to stop, which conflates into a tagline begging the reader to stop taking unlicensed cabs.

Graphic. And shocking. And possibly triggering. And maybe even victim-blaming, though I do think that the reasons why unlicensed cabs are so dangerous need to be promoted. And I think this because I had an interesting discussion with one of my classes the other day, as we looked at a feature in a glossy magazine.

This feature linked in to TfL's Cabwise campaign, and included first-hand accounts of women who had been attacked in unlicensed cabs. When I asked my students if they ever took unlicensed cabs, they all said they did. Every. Single. One Of Them. These are bright second-year undergraduates, who for reasons of cost or convenience place their safety at risk every weekend. I was shocked. I've written about feeling unsafe even in licensed black cabs before, and I really could not believe that these young people weren't aware of the dangers. We went through the article, pinpointing all the reasons why they shouldn't take unlicensed cabs, and by the end of the session they all promised that they wouldn't do it again.

But they may. Who knows? If this shocking new Cabwise campaign reminds some young people to keep safe, I suspect that TfL will argue that it's been worth it. Much as I agree with the principle behind it, I'm unconvinced.

First up, Sir Ian Botham talks about his new book, My Sporting Heroes, and the interviewer asks him why all but one of his heroes are men. Botham replies: "It's probably because I know more about their sports. It's not meant to be a slight on women at all. In fact that might be something we look at."

And he has a point. Women's sport is under-represented in the media. I'm fascinated by his comment about it being "something we look at". Will Sir Ian become a campaigner to promote women's sport? If anyone can do it, he can.

Second, an Olympic athlete whose German national high jump record was declared null in 1936 because she was Jewish has seen it put back into the record books. Margaret Lambert, who was previously called Gretel Bergmann, jumped 2.2m in Stuttgart on June 30th 1936, but it was wiped out a fortnight later. Now the country's athletic association has restored the record and requested her inclusion in Germany's sports hall of fame. Lambert is now 95, living in New York, and is delighted. "That's very nice and I appreciate it," she's quoted as saying.

And finally congratulations to Charlotte Edwards, captain of the England cricket team, who picked up her MBE from the Princess Royal yesterday.

The BBC announced this on Friday morning, saying that his co-host Tess Daly would take over his presenting duties. If you don't watch Strictly, usually Bruce is out in the ballroom, reading the links, introducing the couples, and eliciting the judges' comments; Tess is backstage getting the dancers' reactions after they've performed.

When I heard that Tess would be out front, I assumed that they'd get a chap in to do the backstage bits, for balance, speculating about former champions Mark Ramprakash and Darren Gough, or pro dancer Matthew Cutler. So I was delighted when the Beeb revealed later that day that Claudia Winkleman, presenter of the show's spin-off It Takes Two, would be taking on Tess's usual role.

Still with me? Good.

And then Strictly began on Saturday night, and Tess was joined on the dance floor by Ronnie Corbett.

RONNIE CORBETT.

Seriously.

A fine comedian, a great ambassador for British light entertainment, I'm sure, but with no tangible links to Strictly or ballroom dancing. Except, of course, for the fact that he's great mates with Brucie. If Corbett wasn't exaggerating, Forsyth asked him to take over for the week.

This leads me to ask first why on earth Forsyth is sorting out his own temp cover when he's off sick, and second why on earth the BBC put up with it. The effect of bringing on Corbett as a senior male figure, sitting on the sidelines to watch over Daly and Winkleman doing the hard work, is one of the BBC not trusting the girlies to be able to handle the show themselves, and Forsyth jealously guarding his territory.

The irony is that in my humble opinion Tess did Bruce's job much better than he does now, and Claudia did Tess's job much better than she does now. When the time comes for a shake-up, I wonder if the BBC will consider an all-female presenting team? After all, there are no issues with all-male teams. Or would two women on prime-time television be too much oestrogen for the television-viewing public to handle?

They add the World Twenty20 title to the World Cup they already have, and they are also the holders of the Ashes.

When the men’s team regained the Ashes in 2005, captain Michael Vaughan was awarded an OBE, while the rest of the squad got MBEs, regardless of their contributions.

Yet for the women, only captain Charlotte Edwards has so far been recognised for her efforts. She got an MBE in the Queen’s birthday honours (and, incidentally, was soundly patronised on Sky News, who concluded their interview with her by asking if she was going to go shopping for a pretty new dress to wear. I’m fairly sure nobody asked Michael Vaughan about his sartorial choices when he got his gong).

The rest of the side haven’t yet had any recognition for their fantastic achievements - and make no mistake, these are achievements that deserve to be lauded, regardless of one’s feelings about the monarch-led honours list or international sport. With the support of the ECB, who now have their first female advisors on their board, this is a professionally-run set-up, and the work has paid off - these women are fine ambassadors for the sport as well as role models, and are the very best in the world at what they do.

Women’s sport is often under-reported or even ignored, and this is the time to redress the balance, as the ECB have started to do so commendably. Their achievements have surpassed their male counterparts - they at least deserve parity of recognition.

So how can we frustrated cricket fans do that? “Civilians” can nominate people for honours - click here to go through to the website, which contains information as well as the necessary forms. I’ve also submitted an e-petition to the 10 Downing Street website - as soon as it’s approved, I’ll place the link here so that you can add your name if you wish.

Jane Stichbury, CBE and QPM, is Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary for the South of England Region; and Rachael Heyhoe Flint, OBE DL, became a champion for the cause of women's cricket during her 24-year reign as England player and captain from 1960, when she made 51 appearances for England and scored 30 centuries at all levels.

Heyhoe Flint has been a trailblazer for women's cricket - she was also partly instrumental in the creation of the first Women's Cricket World Cup in 1973; she captained England in the first ever women's match at Lord's in 1976 when they defeated Australia by eight wickets; she campaigned for nine years to enable women to become members of the MCC; and in 1999 she was one of the first 10 women to be named MCC Honorary Life members.

Great news for them and for women's cricket, and we can only hope that the stuffy image English cricket has will be shed for good soon. It certainly seems as though internal attitudes are altering, as ECB chairman Giles Clarke welcomed the women effusively: "ECB is delighted that Jane and Rachael have agreed to join ECB as their knowledge and experience will greatly strengthen our board. Women's cricket is one of the fastest growing areas of our sport and I am delighted to welcome our first two female members to our Bbard meetings."

"It is hard for any man to play a lady," the Sky Sports pundit has just commented.

Anyway, she was in action today in the UK Open, which has a bit of a tradition of women competing, if only on a small-scale. She's been knocked out 5-2 by Andy Roberts, and the commentators are delighted to share in the relief he must be feeling. I genuinely hope that Dobromyslova fulfils her potential at some point soon and puts these poor, poor men through the wringer and into the 21st century.

She's the first woman in the award's 120-year history to be given the accolade.

Well done to her and the rest of the England team.

Incidentally, when the so-called liberal lefty Guardian finally got round to covering the women's fantastic run, the comments box over-ran with readers suggesting that rather doing live over-by-over coverage of the men's rather dull and disappointing tour of the West Indies, there could be live over-by-over coverage of the women's tilt at the trophy. No word on that yet, though. Surprising.

EDIT: The England women beat New Zealand by four wickets. I am so inordinately happy and proud. Congratulations!

Well, Simon Barnes - the well-known appreciator of Russian pole vaulter Elena Isinbaeva - has written about the ongoing Allen Stanford saga. Fair enough. Except apparently the whole debacle confirms that "sport is a whore".

This is because sport is there for the recreational pleasure of men, of course.

"When a billionaire comes a-calling, sport doesn't waste its precious time by saying, 'I'm not that kind of girl.' No, one whiff of the inside of a fat wallet and sport is flat on its back with its legs in the air, shouting: 'Come and get it.'”

That metaphor might be crass, but Barnes's penultimate paragraph is nauseating:

"Just because you can make money from a situation, it doesn't mean you have to. Say you are a man married to an unspeakably beautiful woman. There is a clear commercial opportunity here: you could rent her out by the hour to billionaires. But perhaps you think that she, perhaps you think that your relationship with her, perhaps you think that the whole concept of marriage, is worth more than quite a lot of money."

Of course! An obvious business opportunity! If a man has married an "unspeakably beautiful woman", then evidently she is then his property, and only a belief in the concept of marriage would prevent him from acting as her pimp!

I'm never that comfortable in taxis by myself anyway, and this driver in particular made me feel uneasy. My feelings were compounded when I requested a receipt and was given a slip of paper with this advert on the other side -

I have, of course, complained to the Public Carriage Office, who are in charge of TfL's management of black cabs. I'll report back when I hear anything.

Edit (10/02/2009) - Thanks to a reader comment, we've altered the picture so that the faces aren't identifiable and the phone numbers aren't legible.

I got a response from the Public Carriage Office, apologising for my "unpleasant experience" and noting the incident down on file. From what they say, it seems that this kind of advertising would not adhere to the "general guidelines applicable to all London licensed taxi drivers".

So I was really excited about reading his new book, with its debunking of medical myths, its explanation of the peer review process, and of course the occasional bit of traditional gender politics.

Wait. Really? Traditional gender politics? From a Guardian columnist? Well, yes, and I was surprised and disappointed. Every so often, there's a passing comment that made me think, "Hang on, he's written this book for men to read."

Take for example -

"...those new building blocks are converted into muscle, and bone, and tongue, and bile, and sweat, and bogey, and hair, and skin, and sperm, and brain, and everything that makes you you..."

Speaking for myself, I have no sperm, neither mine nor anyone else's. Adding in that gender-specific noun in the midst of a sweeping list of universal characteristics is jarring. But through goodwill and residual affection for Dr Goldacre, I read on.

He suggests buying a microscope kit and recommends "looking at your sperm: it's quite a soulful moment".

Nope, still got none of that stuff. I will have to forego that particular meaningful experience.

When talking about the power of placebo, he mentions examples of "mothers enduring biblical pain to avoid dropping a boiling kettle on their baby, or people lifting cars off their girlfriend" - "people"? Or "men"? Or is it the same thing? Indeed, he makes other references to "your girlfriend" - I'd like to think he was using that as an inclusive term for all in relationships with women, but I suspect lesbians aren't included, and heterosexual women certainly aren't.

That's not to say I think any of this was deliberate. On the contrary, he writes of the disappointing under-representation of young women in the sciences, and lauds the work of the Barbie Liberation Organisation, and decries the horrific infant and maternal mortality rates around the world and throughout history, and criticises the "paternalistic" attitudes to medicine, and he's careful to interchange the pronouns "he" and "she" when creating hypothetical situations for doctors. That's why the slips into bad gender politics are so obvious that it's like being hit over the head with a hammer.

Have you read it? What do you think?

I was pleasantly surprised to hear the crowd's huge support for her (shockingly, to the extent where they were booing every dart van Eijden threw).

I wasn't so pleasantly surprised to see that Dobromyslova still had to walk on to the stage with pretty lady models accompanying her, albeit both carrying banners (one reading "Girl Power" decorated with a flower, and one reading "Women Rule" written in glitter).

Nor was I surprised to hear the television commentators tying themselves in knots about how best to describe her - through cliches about her sex (what with the darts terminology of "legs" and "lipstick", they were in their element)? About her nationality (Sid Waddell compared her eyes to those of a Siberian sea-eagle at one point)? Or about her name (there were lots of references to being "regal" and "a princess")?

And, sadly, nor was I surprised to see Wayne Mardle's nauseatingly gleeful television interview after her defeat. Maybe he should take a leaf out of former world champion John Part's book - when asked how he'd feel if he lost to a woman, he looked a bit puzzled and answered that he wouldn't care; he'd feel the same if he lost to anyone, male or female.

She didn't; Mardle won 5-4, but the closeness of the match clearly rankles from the evidence of this Guardian interview.

"I'm not joking. I would have emigrated to Vegas and you would have never seen me again. It would have been unbearable — especially on the exhibition scene. Every time it would be the same old story: 'There's a woman here, Wayne, that fancies her chances against you!' I would never have heard the end of it. A lot of male players actually wanted me to lose — those who think I'm too brash. But most serious followers of the game understood how important it was that I beat her."

Thank goodness darts's noble tradition has been upheld. Incidentally, Dobromyslova will be competing in this year's PDC World Championship, starting this weekend - only the second-ever woman to do so.

"8.01pm: Right, Nintendo DS game inventors. Girls like PINK so you make them a PINK CONSOLE. They like LICKLE FLUFFY BUNNIES so you get Girls Aloud to advertise a looking-after-pets game. And they should all GET MARRIED so you get Fearne and Holly to advertise a wedding-design game. Fantastic patriarchal brainwashing. Good work. I shall step down from my soapbox now."

And then I went into Woolworths today and saw not only Imagine: Dream Weddings but also Imagine: Babies and Imagine: Happy Cooking. As well as these domestic-focused games, there are some subtle nudges as to appropriate girly careers - Imagine: Fashion Designer, Imagine: Teacher, Imagine: Interior Designer...Any further suggestions for the next game in the line? Imagine: Loading the Dishwasher? Imagine: Sorting Your Delicates?

For those of you who don't follow cricket, Mr Stanford is a very rich man who is currently funding a Twenty20 tournament in Antigua, in which England are participating. He was pictured on Sunday sitting with the England players' wives and girlfriends, and at one stage had Emily Prior, wife of wicketkeeper Matt, perched on his knee.

Echoes of Rio Ferdinand attributing part of the England football team's failure to the media interest in the players' wives and girlfriends, perhaps, but since then, there's been a bit of a furore about it, with bowler Stuart Broad speaking for his team-mates: "There were a few gobsmacked faces when it popped up on the big screen. Matt was in state of total shock, especially as his wife is pregnant." Stanford rang Matt Prior to apologise, and also called captain Kevin Pietersen to pass on his regret for causing offence.

And it's only just occurred to me - maybe I've been too caught up in watching the cricket - where are the women in this story? Why is Stanford held totally culpable? Why does he have to apologise? Why is it worse for Matt Prior because his wife is pregnant? Maybe everyone's conduct was a teensy bit inappropriate, but it's not like there was an orgy going on in the stands, nor that anyone was harassed.

Presumably behind closed doors the couples have fought it out, but I can't help feeling sorry for Stanford - or at least as sorry as you can feel for a billionaire with his own cricket ground.

More interestingly, perhaps, Sara Folino came third. She's the Australian PA who went into the house in week 4, and was subject to some horrifying sexist abuse from fellow housemates Rex Newmark and Darnell Swallow, and to a lesser extent Mohamed Mohamed. She was called an "ugly bitch" and a "slut", mostly for having the temerity to not particularly fancy Swallow, and the producers received thousands of complaints.

None of the housemates had any formal action taken against them; instead they were warned that they were being monitored. Sara seemed to decide after that that it was easier just to flirt with Darnell to flatter his ego, and so deflect the misogynist abuse.

Viewers had their own vengeance. Mohamed was evicted on Tuesday; Swallow and Newmark were the first two out tonight; and Sara finished third.

As I suspected, in Swallow's interview with Davina, she failed to mention his vicious attacks on Folino; in Folino's interview shortly afterwards, McCall suggested that her flirtatious behaviour and subsequent rejection of Swallow had been the cause of the attacks, because it had hurt his pride. As always, it's the temptress's fault when a man loses his temper.

Did you watch any of Big Brother 9? If so, what did you think of the Sara-Darnell incident, or Davina's interviews?

And then he went and ruined it all by saying that these "people" who were asking these questions were "feminist groups".

That's because the didgeridoo is viewed in some Aboriginal cultures as a solely male preserve, and if a female even touches it, it'll lead to all manner of evil, including infertility.

I'd be relatively impressed with HC's defiant stance if it was in fact a stance, but it seems they just hadn't done their research - they "weren't aware" of any taboos on the instrument. However, at the moment they're sticking to their guns. It'll be interesting to see if they bow to pressure.

The Times's Chief Sports Photographer Marc Aspland has put together this photo gallery for his colleague Simon Barnes, "all my red-blooded colleagues who are into their third week away from home and all the lads in my 5-a-side football team back home."

The gallery focuses on Elena Isinbaeva, the Russian pole vaulter who is Olympic champion and the world record holder. Well, I say it focuses on Isinbaeva - mostly it focuses on her buttocks, although it does also feature her stomach. A photo of her face is noticeable by its absence.

I'm not going to go into the theory of fetishisation and the gaze and dehumanisation, because it's patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that reducing this magnificent athlete to a couple of body parts is offensive and asinine. The comments below the piece from readers do, in the main, bear this out.

And as some have said, there would never be a similar gallery produced of, say, Alexander Despatie or Rafael Nadal. But then, I can't imagine any of the straight women or gay men I know who work in sports journalism even thinking about doing this - not just because it's disgusting, but because the profession is a bastion of male heterosexual privilege. Anyone on the inside who deviates from the standardised beliefs and opinions and objects to nonsense like this or attempts to redress the balance will be pretty firmly and promptly squashed.