AS someone who has long paid over the odds for showpiece concerts by my favourite artists, I’m accustomed to reading stories about the outrage over high prices. The latest case is Harry Styles (“Is a Harry Styles concert ticket now a luxury beyond most Britons?”, September 4).

Part of the problem as I see it is that artists (including some of the people I have followed for years) is that it really is all about the money. The fact that a cost-of-living crisis now affects millions of people genuinely means nothing to them, not when they’re worth many millions of pounds and never have to work again.

Yes, they have expensive stage shows to produce, but we have yet to hear of a major act going bankrupt after a worldwide tour.

The ‘dynamic pricing’ system that many ticket retailers now operate has evidently caught out many fans, such as the woman who unwittingly paid £700 for two Harry Styles tickets that she initially believed would cost her £300.

It’s also a fact that too many fans will pay through the nose for the chance to see their favourite act in concert. Even if they go into debt, or can’t afford to pay the rent, it seems to be a price worth paying.

I really don’t know what the answer is. I have regretfully decided to boycott a couple of my own favourites, who’re touring next year. I’m the only one who will lose out from this, but ticket prices are now just so off-the-charts that a widespread fan boycott might be the only thing that makes major acts see sense.

D.Stewart, Glasgow.

* EXCELLENT article on ticket pricing. I found the part on “dynamic pricing” for the upcoming Harry Styles gig very interesting. One way to get around this I have found is to only go and see bands that have a very poor following.

Carl McCoy, Paisley.


I READ the depressing item about Glasgow University’s probe into Professor John Paul Leach’s use in a lecture of a slide titled ‘The Female Brain’ (“Anger over professor’s ‘female brain’ image”, September 4).

It neatly illustrates the everyday sexism, dressed up as humorous banter, that women from all walks of life, including in the hallowed halls of higher education, still have to live with in our so-called enlightened society.

Had I been one of the bright, aspirational, hard-working female undergraduates sitting in that lecture, I would have been indignant and insulted, and hope I would have had the confidence to walk out of the lecture theatre.

A few pages later in the same paper, I read Lennie Pennie’s article, “Women like me are so sick of unwanted sexual comments”.

Treatment of any group that belittles, trivialises and objectifies them should not be tolerated in any society.

Women have been struggling for centuries to achieve fairness and equality and here we are in the 21st century, still being subjected to insidious and demeaning messages in the very places where the fight for equality should be strongest – university and the media.

I know that not all men undermine and disrespect women, but still society allows too many to perpetuate behaviours and attitudes that at the least cause offence and at worst, actual harm.

Beverley Gardiner, Glasgow.


I FIND it to be profoundly inappropriate that anyone, particularly one who is head of undergraduate medicine at the University of Glasgow, should wish to share with students such a sexist illustration.

Such behaviour represents an affront not only to the many women who have succeeded in making their way through many ceilings (glass and otherwise) as they pursued their careers, but also to many young women with hopes of advancement in whatever vocation or job they are set upon.

It is clearly less than uplifting for women to be disparaged in such a gratuitously offensive way.

With the background brought out by The Herald in this case, it comes as less of a surprise that research by the British Medical Association concluded that nine out of 10 female doctors have experienced sexism at work in the UK .

It is reported that Professor Leach’s Twitter biography includes the statement, “thinks he’s funny”. There are many others, I am sure, in addition to women targeted by this image , who have concluded: “It’s no joke”.

Ian W Thomson, Lenzie.


I NOTICED quite a few comments in the press and social media about the Scottish Government awarding a contract to Canadian companies for development of options for the Rest And Be Thankful road problems.

The comments imply that the work will be carried out in Canada, to our loss.

I think, for fairness, it is worth pointing out that the two companies – SNC-Lavalin (formerly Atkins) and WSP – albeit with Canadian parent companies, are international civil engineering consultants, both with a significant presence in Scotland as well as all over the UK.

I personally know a number of their Scottish-based engineers who work on projects throughout Europe and the rest of the world.

There is enough politicking goes on in Scotland without trying to include this. The important thing is to get the right solution for this road for the benefit of the community it serves.

Duncan Sooman, Milngavie.


RONALD Singleton (letters, September 4) may not have seen a cyclist fitted with a bell but he’ll almost certainly have seen a bicycle fitted with one. It is mandatory when selling a new bike that one be fitted though it is not thereafter mandatory to have one on a bike. “Having” and “using” something are different things, of course.

The Highway Code suggests that cyclists be considerate of other road users by letting them know they are there where necessary by, for example, ringing their bell. Being considerate of others is always good advice in whatever capacity one interacts with them.

It is difficult to imagine that legislation could of itself increase consideration, as it is a social and educational issue. However, no doubt kindness and compassion to others will be at the forefront of the mind of our new Prime Minister, and a new caring tone will be set.

Grant McKechnie, Glasgow.