Okay, so, two things:

1) I’m not Irish, and don’t live in Ireland, so maybe I should shut the f*ck up.

2) Chances are, by the time you - the average visitor to Marceltipool.com - read this, voting will have taken place, and my assumption, from over here in Britain two days before, is that Ireland will have voted Yes in a big way.

Well, to deal with both of those points, I’m nailing my colours to the mast on this referendum because I see it as a vote to legalise, and further the legitimisation of, abortion, both in Ireland and globally. Should Ireland vote Yes, then this piece can act as one of many examples of a counterargument whenever someone campaigning for easier access to abortion says “Even Ireland’s with us now!”

Yesterday, I had a conversation with a friend. Said friend is black. I am white. Ordinarily, these facts would be entirely irrelevant, but for the reasons which follow, they are on this occasion pertinent.

In passing, I mentioned that when I had first moved to the area of the country which I currently reside in, I had initially struggled to find work. In fact, I had struggled to even make it to interview stage, and despite the obvious shortcomings in my character and employment history outlined in my CV, the lack of interest seemed odd. That was until a friend of a friend, back at the time I was going through this struggle, pointed out to me that "Mate, they think you're black."

As the area where I live is backward on so many levels - it truly is a sh*thole, it has to be said - I actually gave, and still do give, some credence to this theory. My legal first name is, generally speaking, one which is given to Afro-Caribbean people far more than it is given to white people, in this country at least, and many people around here are d*cks. The idea that they are racist d*cks is not much of a leap. The idea that they are so idiotic, and arrogant in their idiocy, that they would racially discriminate - erroneously, in my case - seems, sadly, to follow.

Theresa May today announced there would be a six-week consultation over the use of "stop and search" powers by the police. Apparently, she wants to ensure that the police are only using stop and search "when it is needed", as otherwise it is "a dreadful waste of police time", and there is talk of the procedure leading to certain ethnic minority groups - who are seven times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people - feeling persecuted and regarding the action as antagonistic.

What an horrendously, unfeelingly pragmatic way of viewing a truly abhorrent way of treating members of the public. Firstly, the desire for stop and search to only be used when needed is incredibly damning and surely should be expanded upon. The suggestion - which we all know is fact - that police officers are abusing the power, most likely through personal or institutionalised racism - most likely both - should be a declaration in the form of condemnation, not muttered as an issue that needs to be ironed out as it is not resource-effective, especially in the wake of revelations concerning the family of Stephen Lawrence being spied upon. The talk of worries that communities which are most affected by this abuse may be antagonised - resulting in retaliation such as the 2011 civil unrest - is sickening. So it's ok to bully black people as long as there's no chance of them ever causing you a problem off the back of it? What about considering the turmoil each individual is put through?

So, the talk today is of Conor McGregor versus Khabib Nurmagomedov being a very real possibility, perhaps for a UFC Russia/Moscow event. A couple of weeks after Conor McGregor threw a sack barrow at a bus, smashing a window and injuring colleagues, the hype train is back on track - thanks to the Barclays Center incident of course - and the biggest fight in UFC history may well happen.

So was it real anger? Or self-promotion? (By McGregor? Or by the UFC and McGregor?)

"The best episode of Take Me Out ever". You'd probably still change the channel, right? Perhaps. But you'd read about it in the aftermath.

Sorry, to be clear, this hasn't happened. Yet. This is not a review; it is, rather, a preview. It is surely a preview.

So here's how it goes down: Host Paddy McGuinness, as is his wont, makes some jokes that are construed as being sexist, chauvinistic and patronising (delete as applicable and more of which later), a group of women are introduced and, then, finally, after an innuendo or two, another human is lowered into the room for the aforementioned women's perusal.

But, on this occasion, it's not a man who's lowered in (it is usually. Check). Instead (drum roll), it's a woman.