Skip to main content

Day: 23 November 2012

‘Mafia Twitter trolls’ and my morbid obsession with celeb gossip

Written by Sophie Donovan on . Posted in Music.

Gossip is an activity we partake in almost every day. Usually but not exclusively of a sexual nature, we are fascinated by what everyone else is doing. Apart from affirming our feelings of superiority by sniggering at the mishaps of others, the purpose of gossip is usually to impress.

 
Not unlike endlessly repeating quotes from Alan Partridge, we blather the hearsay of others in the hope that our audience will fall about laughing; duped into thinking that we are hilarious and interesting.

 

But the more tenuous our link to the subject, the less interesting the tale – so why am I so fascinated by the relationships of pop stars I don’t even like?

 
I was genuinely upset to hear that Taylor Swift had gone out with leather-choker-enthusiast Ed Sheeran and I didn’t know about it. But why would I know? I don’t buy their records, I don’t follow them on Twitter and I don’t even like them (although respect to Sheeran for writing a lyric that describes a face as “crumbling like pastries” without anyone noticing). I would understand my interest if I adored them artistically or loved boys with ginger bum-fluff.

 
It would make sense if I was passionately anti-Swift and detested Eds – then I could jeer at the Daily Mail website and spitefully remark “you deserve each other!” But what baffles me is why I expect to know the personal details of people who, otherwise, I have no interest in whatsoever.

 
More Swift news that I was shocked I didn’t know was that she’d been spotted holding hands with pube-less heart-throb Harry Styles and had received a barrage of Twitter-hatred from furious fans. One Direction’s Louis Tomlinson referred to their terrifying online troll mafia as aggressive “extremists” in a recent interview, and suggested that it was a “minority offence”. The viral crimes of these offenders have meant the permanent abstinence of Burberry model, Edie Campbell from Twitter, after she posed with the band for a photo-shoot and was ironically told she “looked like a troll”. More extraordinary tweets from 1D fans include the remarkably medieval “I WILL KILL YR FIRSTBORN”, and the simply put, “If u dating my harry, i kill u’.

 

Now, it’s clear that these maniacs have a vested interest in this gossip. They’ve publically announced their plots to murder a celebrity and their future children. They care. And despite myself, so do I.

 
I happened upon “Cheryl – Coming Home Cheryl” on ITV, and like my bewilderment at the title’s extra “Cheryl”, I was confused at the audible gasp that passed my lips at the candid announcement that ‘Tre’ wasn’t just a background dancer featured in the documentary, but was in fact her boyfriend as well!

 
Why hadn’t anyone told me? I have no interest in Cheryl and clearly I’m unaware of Tre’s work, but I was visited by the same inner turmoil that plagued me at the Swift news. I have faith, at least, that I will not be using this gossip to impress nor affirm my superiority, as clearly spreading the news of the ordinary relationships of happy rich celebrities will achieve neither. But, I’m unsure if this voluntary hysteria will pass soon.

Is it us or them?

Written by Ellie Riley on . Posted in Theatre.

Four Stars out of Five Stars

Blue/ Orange, Joe Penhall’s award winning play comes to the Opera House on a typically wet and bleak Manchester evening. Sporting a fairly star studded cast, that is if you’re a fan of Hollyoaks and Downton Abbey. It is a highly realistic story questioning the relationships between psychiatry, race and insanity, with a satirical twist running throughout.

 

It tells the story of Christopher, played by Oliver Wilson, who delivered a highly engaging and believable performance, he believes his father is military dictator, Idi Amin, and has been sectioned under the Mental Health Act. The ultimate power and ego struggle ensues, as his doctor, Bruce, played by Gerard McCarthy, believes it is too soon for Christopher to be released, diagnosing him with Schizophrenia. Whilst consultant Psychiatrist Robert, is keen to release him back into the community. Played by Robert Bathurst, Robert, best known for his roles in Downton Abbey and Wild at Heart, delivers a thoroughly entertaining performance, whose dry and satirical delivery provided light relief and humour at such a complex issue.

 

Through research like The Human Genome project, it has been discovered that in 90-95% of cases genes are not the cause of Schizophrenia. Therefore Blue/Orange addresses the more controversial, confusing, potential underlying causes; race, environment and culture. Issues that, as we see portrayed in Blue/Orange, can evoke extreme opposing views, and throughout the play my perceptions of the two sparring medical professionals continued to intertwine. At one moment I had labelled Bruce as genuine and good, and Robert as arrogant and obnoxious. At one point I was questioning their sanity! Are the medical professionals probing and thinking too deep? However as the performance progressed I found myself wavering and I could understand both sides of the arguments and issues raised.

 

The sparseness of the staging was extremely eye catching upon first glimpse of the stage, I heard utterances of, “well, they haven’t spent much money on the set”. With just a desk, water cooler small table, fruit-bowl and 3 chairs, the set was minimalist to say the least. This along with the fact that there were only ever 3 actors on stage created a really engaging performance for the audience, as it drew all your concentration to the extremely complex topic being dealt with.

 

By the end of the play, we are still questioning who is right and wrong, and trying to resolve certain issues. This to me represented the limited and differing insight into mental illness and in particular Schizophrenia, in today’s society. It leaves you questioning sanity, we blindly assume we know what ‘sane’ is. Penhall has blurred the boundaries between what and who we believe to be sane and insane, forcing you to question your own opinions. This is a deeply thought provoking performance, which I found really intriguing. It may not be to everyone’s taste, it requires concentration throughout, discussing a fairly taboo topic.  Nonetheless it is fast paced, engaging, brilliantly acted and will leave you questioning your perceptions of the two debating sides.

Blue/Orange runs until 24th November at the Manchester Opera House

No Women Bishops? No Bishops in the Lords

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Opinion.

In the wake of the Church of England’s decision not to let women become Bishops, what place does the Church have in our political system? Currently with twenty-six automatic seats in the House of Lords, the bishops of this country have significant political presence. The recent vote of the church to not allow women to become Bishops shows further that the church is an outdated, sexist organisation – with no right to influence politics in this country.

The decision of the vote is not supported by those most influential in the Church. But one glance at the tweeted response of Justin Welby, the soon-to-be leader of the Church, and it becomes pretty clear that religious bodies have no place in politics. He tweeted that it had been a ‘very grim day, most of all for women priests and supporters’. Welby also spoke of the need to ‘co-operate with our healing God’. It’s hard to imagine David Cameron emerging from a political vote bemoaning a result in which the vast majority of the country and its political representatives had been thwarted by such a small a minority of unelected, unrepresentative misogynists. Welby may say that the problem lies within the voting procedures and not within the institution as a whole. However, no Prime minister can hide behind a ‘healing’ third party, rather than tackling the issues at hand. If the House of Lords acts to challenge the government and ensure that the will of the electorate is represented in the Commons, what place have the leaders of an institution which can’t ensure that the voice of its own majority is heard?

In response to the decision of the vote, MPs have begun an e-petition to remove the right of the Church of England to have automatic seats in the House of Lords. Their petition is as follows:

The Church of England on 20th Nov 2012 voted not to allow women to be Bishops. Though that is within its rights to do, this should worry the Government as Church of England Bishops are awarded legislative power through seats in the House of Lords.

The Church has chosen to be a sexist organisation by refusing women the right to hold highest leadership positions and therefore should not be allowed automatic seats in the House of Lords, as this clearly does not comply with the spirit of UK Equality law.

We call on the Govt to remove the right of the Church of England to have automatic seats in the House of Lords, in line with its commitments to equality and non-discrimination, set out in the Equality Act (2010) and the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979)”

The e-petition can be found at : http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/42117

Arguments of democracy, equality and secularity are the strongest for this case. In practical terms, the Bishops have little influencing power. It is hoped that this petition will encourage the removal of Bishops from the Lords due to their symbolic presence, more so than their power in practice.

Out of the 760 seats overall in the House of Lords, the Church holds only twenty-six of them. This is compared to 212 Conservative, 225 Labour, and 90 Liberal Democrat peers. So in practical terms, if turnout were 100% in the House of Lords, and party lines held all the time, the Bishops would never influence law – the vote would go to the coalition every time. However, allowing Bishops automatic seats in the House of Lords undermines the credibility of our democracy. We are a highly developed liberal country, and this appears to contradict our morality. An organisation that is exempt from some aspects of the law, such as the Church of England is with the equality legislation act has no place in our parliament.

Speaking to students unaware of the issue, it was surprising how many were shocked and appalled that such an undemocratic practise was still operating in this country. Laurence Jones-Williams, a member of Manchester Universities Humanist Group, told The Mancunion ‘It’s a wonder how in the 21st century we still allow seemingly 18th century practices. The recent decision of the Church further shows the illegitimacy of the Bishops’ presence in the House of Lords’.

If you agree with the arguments above, I urge you to sign the petition. The fact the argument is in the political spectrum at all in the 21st century is unnerving, a stark reminder of one of the many obstacles we still have to overcome to become a truly liberal progressive society. The recent vote has shown that sadly the Church is not moving with the times, let alone reflecting the vast majority opinion in this country.

 

Breakthrough in search for arthritis cure

Written by David Burch on . Posted in News.

A major breakthrough has been made by University of Manchester researchers looking for a cure for arthritis.

The groundbreaking study, published in the journal Nature Genetics, involved scientists studying the DNA samples from more than 27,000 patients with the disease.

Researchers already know environmental factors such as smoking, diet, pregnancy and infection can cause the disease, but new research shows that genetic disposition also influences the likelihood of developing it.

14 new genes were discovered that can lead to rheumatoid arthritis – a disease that affects around 70 million worldwide, and over 400,000 people in the UK.

Alongside 32 genes already linked to the disease, the researchers now feel they have discovered nearly all the genes that contribute to the disease.

Study author Dr Stephen Eyre stated the potential of the findings to be used for the development of drugs to help those afflicted with the disease.

“This work will have a great impact on the treatment of arthritis. We have already found three genes that are targets for drugs, leaving 43 genes with the potential for drug development”.

At present a third of patients don’t respond well to medications that have been developed for the disease.

Professor Alan Silman, medical director of Arthritis Research UK, hopes that these discoveries will lead to a “greater understanding of the disease and allow us to develop targeted drug treatments for the people currently living with rheumatoid arthritis.”

The study also reveals the genetic association between rheumatoid arthritis and the X chromosome, helping to understand why three times more women develop the disease than men.

But the researchers’ work is far from over, as Professor Jane Worthington indicated.

“Our future work will focus on understanding how the simple genetic changes alter normal biological processes and lead to disease. Ultimately, this will help us to develop novel therapies.”