Who knows what prompted Solange Knowles to lash out at her brother-in-law, Jay-Z, in a lift at the Met ball, held back by a bodyguard, while her sister, Beyoncé, passively observed? Was Solange drunk, frustrated about her career, sticking up for her sister – all or none of the above? The recently released (carefully vague) statement from the Knowles-Carter camp about the "unfortunate incident" revealed nothing. However, in my opinion, it would be a mistake to view that video scuffle as in any way comparable, never mind equivalent, to the bulk of male on female violence.

Since the incident, there have been relentless debates along the lines of: "If it had been Jay-Z attacking Solange, there would have been an outcry, he'd have been arrested, his career and reputation destroyed – so why does a woman get away with it?" However, this seems painfully simplistic. While there are exceptions, in the majority of cases, FOM violence is different to MOF violence, in myriad ways, ranging from context, scale and intent to self-defence, sexual attacks and death rates.

It's important to note that what happened in the lift was not domestic violence, which can be suffered by both sexes, albeit predominantly women. A woman momentarily lashing out at her brother-in-law at a social event does not count as domestic violence. Perhaps it could have been assault had the bodyguard not intervened. However, even unprotected, would Jay-Z have felt under genuine physical threat from his sister-in-law? Not that women should feel entitled to attack men, but this is a distinction that needs to be made. The differences in physical size and/or strength between the sexes mean that most men are simply not physically scared of most women.

What's more, women tend to be aware of this, if only subliminally. Some females might have periods in their life when they get "slap-happy", primarily when socialising, maybe when attention seeking, usually when drunk (guilty!). When they stop this behaviour, it's usually because they're ashamed, embarrassed or have belatedly realised they're disgusting dogs who can't hold their drink. Whatever the reason, it's unlikely to have anything to do with men being frightened of them. On the contrary, it's wired into the female DNA that in the main they're under threat rather than the threat.

If anything, most women would take it completely for granted that men are not remotely frightened of them. And that's because male physical fear of women is not the norm – there's no dominant culture of hostile matriarchy, where men need to be hyper-vigilant of female violence, or versed in ways to combat it.

There are no self-defence classes taught to men in how to deal with female attacks, sexual or otherwise. As for domestic violence statistics, while there are male victims, who should not be discounted, there isn't the infamous average of two men a week being killed by their partners, as remains the case with women.

None of this has anything to do with Solange and Jay-Z in the Met ball lift, but that's the point. Context becomes important when people start pondering simplistically: "Well, what if it had been a man attacking a woman?" and absurdly leave it at that. In truth, you'd have to take into account obvious physical differences between the sexes generally, and the individuals in particular, not to mention the surrounding culture of patriarchy/entitlement and violence against and subjugation of women.

This is why Solange's attack wasn't disturbing or meaningful in the same way that it would have been if she'd been attacked by a male. Ideally, no one should be attacking someone else. However, the fact that women have always had far more reason to be physically afraid of male violence, rather than vice versa, is hardly news. While female violence gets a disproportionate amount of attention, it's male violence that remains dominant.

Actually Sepp, it ain't half hot in Qatar

Fifa president Sepp Blatter has admitted that it was a "mistake" to choose Qatar as hosts for the 2022 World Cup as it is "too hot" during the summer, and the event will probably have to be moved to cooler months.

Would this be the same heat affecting the thousands of migrant construction workers said to be working in slave conditions in Qatar, often on projects connected with getting the country prepared for the World Cup? Qatar's stance on homosexuality, and general human rights record, might also constitute more forceful arguments for Fifa's decision being a mistake.

All this after England famously failed in its attempt to host the World Cup, with David Beckham, Prince William and David Cameron leading the bid, amid accusations of a "fix", though some of us were just as irritated by the stench of delusional over-entitlement wafting from the England camp. My view remains the same: if we really want revenge, how about England winning the tournament, or at least getting past the semis, not gently tapping balls straight into rival goalies' outstretched palms during penalty shoot-outs?

Getting back to this "too hot" situation: as I loathe the sun, laughing at the idea of overheated millionaire footballers moaning and holding mini-fans to their armpits would make me a complete hypocrite – so complete hypocrite I am. However, as variables go, too hot would seem quite an easy one to predict – this was something that could have been looked into prior to Fifa's decision.

The simple act of Googling "temperatures in Qatar" at different times of year would have sorted it out. Even if this wasn't the "fix" of legend, Fifa still played a bad game.

How cheap to frown on Nicole's lack of wrinkles

Can Botox-shaming sometimes be pure bitchiness masquerading as the moral high ground? Observe the daily update on Nicole Kidman's "frozen" features, as she promoted her whiffy-sounding Grace of Monaco film. Granted, her visage did look over-stuffed. Still, are Botox and fillers really so new that cries of "J'accuse, Nicole!" are truly warranted?

Pressure on modern women to look ever younger is appalling and not made any better by Hollywood mores. However, give entertainers a break – they have to ply their trade in pitiless HD. In the same position, never mind injecting myself, I'd shoot myself. Male stars' faces are often as plumped up as budget chickens, but they don't attract anything like the same criticism. Nor has the world proved so gallant towards those who attempt to age gracefully – just look at how Diane Keaton was cast as a real-life Methuselah at the Golden Globes.

Botox and fillers are old news – no one over 14 is taken in by those start-lingly smooth faces anymore. Ergo, the routine "outing" of famous women becomes an excuse to gloat, judge and humiliate. In which case, it's not only the likes of Nicole Kidman who need to look in the mirror.